On Monday 16 April 2007 14:29, Frans Pop wrote: > Personally I am strongly in favor of a migration to SVN and would be > against a migration to anything other than SVN. Hi, how about bazaar? The user interface is quite similar to CVS/SVN. For example, the commonly used commands all share the same name: bzr commit or ci, bzr update or up, bzr diff or di, bzr log. See <http://bazaar-vcs.org/BzrForCVSUsers> for some examples. Furthermore, like CVS and SVN, it works on MacOS X and Windows (don't know if this is really relevant, though). If I recall correctly, SVN has better merging capabilities than CVS, but the merging is still a rather difficult and error-prone process. Don't you need to keep track which revisions already have been merged? With bazaar, the merging is much easier. The program determines itself what's missing. Also, it's possible to setup a centralized branch for the WML sources, so that every WML developer can commit to the same location. I think that such a setup would be mostly identical to the current CVS setup, so that no translator would have to learn new commands. However, you still have the option to create a local branch easily or to work offline, without loosing the revision control functionality. Regards, Tobias -- Tobias Toedter | There are two kinds of people, those who finish Hamburg, Germany | what they start and so on.
Description: PGP signature