Subversion is certainly working quite well for us. The atomic commits
are great. And switching from CVS to svn is not that difficult either.
sincerely,
jesus
Matthias.Schmidt@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> The junit guys are discussing switching from cvs to subversion, but staying
> at sourceforge. It is said to be faster.
>
> Maybe that's an alternative for to look into.
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: findbugs-discuss-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:findbugs-discuss-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Tom Copeland
> Gesendet: Montag, 3. April 2006 16:59
> An: findbugs-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: Re: [FB-Discuss] FindBugs is moving off ofSourceForge...Suggestions
> for alternatives?
>
>
>>I would vote for apache.org, but it is hard becoming an
>>apache project, in terms of software quality, test coverage,
>>documentation etc.
>>But of course, that is not a bad thing!!
>
>
> I think the Apache folks would want the code to be under the ASL, not
> the LGPL, too... not sure how hard it'd be to do a license change like
> that, but, anyhow.
>
> But I concur with your comments on this SF downtime... it's pretty
> heinous. I've got a bunch of changes to PMD's JavaCC grammar to check
> in and I hate having that stuff just sitting on my hard drive...
>
> Yours,
>
> Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> Findbugs-discuss mailing list
> Findbugs-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://mailman.cs.umd.edu/mailman/listinfo/findbugs-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> Findbugs-discuss mailing list
> Findbugs-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://mailman.cs.umd.edu/mailman/listinfo/findbugs-discuss
>
|
