[Cabal] The VCS situation

Sean Egan seanegan at gmail.com
Mon Oct 30 15:46:58 EST 2006

On 10/29/06, Daniel Atallah <datallah at pidgin.im> wrote:
> The real issue is that we have two disjointed svn trees right now.
> This is problematic because svn is not designed to run in disjointed
> trees - the files have no relationship to each other and merging
> becomes a nightmare.

I wanted subversion on pidgin.im just so I could commit the artwork
changes and have other people try it and test it, and let the icon
designer commit his work directly instead of having to syphon it
through me.

It's definitely an absolute pain to commit everything to two trees.
I'm not opposed to using pidgin.im svn as a sandbox for now, then
re-importing the sf tree right before we release and  merging my
changes in. They're mostly confined to a few files: gtkblist,
gtkstatusbox, gtkdialogs, gaimstock, plugin, a bunch of makefiile
stuff and the pixmaps/ directory.

> Are we going to actually make the move to a different vcs?
> - There seemed to be at least a strong interest in doing so not too
> long ago - what are the current thoughts.

I'm not too interested in doing so, myself.  We're already changing so
much, it seems like changing version control systems might just cause
more headaches. Also, I think svn's biggest advantage is that people
are already familiar with it

That said, I do not mind being out-voted at all.


More information about the Cabal mailing list