Conversion to SVN

[Spörlein]

On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 12:36:31 -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> On 11/02/2011 11:21, John Baldwin wrote:
> > If you really want to do this in the same repo, I won't object. 
> 
> Just to be clear, I personally do think it's the right design choice,
> sure. But there are also plenty of people who have been talking about
> the benefits that this would bring. It would be nice if some of those
> people speak up now. :)

1. One less thing to admin/maintain (and btw, I'm of the opinion we
should get rid of the svn->cvs exporter, but that's another can of
worms)

2. Changesets spanning source *and* documentation.

3. The possibility to svn mv parts of src into doc and vice versa. Might
actually simplify release building, but I'm not familiar with that.

4. Less confusion about what a svn revision number means. With CVS IDs
everybody knew it's about a file. If we would have two or three SVN
repos, then 'r123456' can mean three wildly different things.

5. There's already more than just source in the svn, namely portmaster
and stress2. It would be nice if we could move all the "user" stuff from
/projects into /user and have /projects be for non-source stuff like
stress2 and portmaster.

And while we're at it, we call it 'docproj', so why not stick it under
/projects/doc ? (I'm only partially serious about this ...)

I'm sure there's more that will only be obvious once we've done the
switch. But the actual doc committers have been very silent on this
subject lately.

Cheers,
Uli