From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2006-11-01T13:52:24+09:00
Subject: Re: [ANN] bfts 1.0.0 Released

Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> Ryan Davis wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 31, 2006, at 11:55 AM, Tim Pease wrote:
>>> You have already
>>> demonstrated your +60 "keyboard of coding might", but this still seems
>>> like a huge project for a single individual. Are you looking for
>>> worker bees to help out on this one?
>>
>> PLEASE. +60 VORPAL keyboard of coding might!
>>
>> Yes, we'd love other contributors.
> 
> I understand SCM preference, but this is probably the primary reason
> projects choose SVN or CVS over anything else. Your average contributor
> is going to be far more likely to know SVN or CVS than P4 or anything
> else. Also, direct tool support for those tends to be greater because
> they're 100% free and pervasive in the OSS community.
> 
> So the tradeoff for your SCM of preference (P4) is ease of contribution.
> If that's not as important, no problem. It would never work for JRuby,
> for example, where we have something like 20 external contributors
> throwing patches at us and even more running off trunk.
> 

I'd be happy if the CVS and SVN folks would settle their war so I don't
need to learn both. :)

Seriously, though, I have two projects on RubyForge, one in CVS and the
other in SVN. Don't ask me why; I don't know. The only one I use
actively is the CVS one.