From: Jon Smirl Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:13:10 GMT Subject: Re: Mozilla, git and Windows Message-ID: <9e4733910611270813g4ff982b0tbe6b57d1d49ca9f7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <456B057E.4000904@shadowen.org> On 11/27/06, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > Jon Smirl wrote: > > In the other thread we are discussing the conversion of Mozilla CVS to > > git format. This is something that has to be done but it is not the > > only issue. Without a native Windows port they won't even consider > > using git. There is also the risk that the features needed by Mozilla > > will be completed after they choose to use a different SCM. > > > > Even if we implement all of the needed features git still needs to win > > the competition against the other possible choices. The last I heard > > the leading candiate is SVN/SVK. > > Do we need to worry too much about taking over the world in one day? > Yes of course git is _the_ superior solution etc, but too many new users > at once is always painful. > > I think you are more likely to win letting them convert over to SVN. > From there people naturally start using git mirrors from the SVN trunk. > Cirtainly I have two projects which do not use git, one in CVS and one > in SVN. I just svnimport that and work in git. I am confident with > time the project will migrate, but I am happy other git users are happy > all without it being the tool of choice. The SVN version of the Mozilla repository is about 3GB. It takes around a week of CPU time for svnimport to process it. -- Jon Smirl