Subject: Re: [boost] DCVS vs CVS: call for constructivism
From: Thomas Heller (thom.heller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-23 06:35:06
On 03/23/2012 10:38 AM, Philippe Vaucher wrote:
>> Constructive while insightful would be great, i.e., to hear from people
>> have extensive experience with BOTH (kinds of) systems, rather than people
>> being used to X and having heard (good and bad rumors) about Y.
>> I happen to be one; and for me, it is a no-brainer. That is not to say
>> that I did not use my brain to some extent while concluding, constructively
>> ;-), that Git is far superior to SVN.
> As someone with the same experience I can only agree with you.
> Unfortunately many boosters seems to express the desire to avoid having to
> put many efforts into learning a new tool.
> While I disagree with them (constantly learning new stuffs is part of a
> developper's job imho), it's hard to tell them they're wrong, especially
> since the people objecting are active maintainers.
I strongly suggest to reconsider that wording. Accusing anybody not
trying to learn new stuff
is just rude.
I admit that many objections are based on fear, uncertainty and doubt.
In order to put those aside, a fully worked out proposal on how the
migration and will be helpful. As far as I understand this will be done
by Beman when he gives his talk at C++Now!.
Anything discussed here before is just a big pile of assumptions etc.
I am sure that a decision can, and will be made after the conference.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk