switching gnulib from CVS to a dVCS

[Jim Meyering]

Simon Josefsson <address@hidden> wrote:
> Jim Meyering <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I did hesitate before asking this, but... :-)
>> Would anyone be averse to switching gnulib development from CVS to git?
>> I switched coreutils a month ago and am very happy with the result.
>
> I've been hesitating to change from cvs in my projects because there
> seem to be too many options available, and it isn't clear exactly what
> the con/pro's are for each alternative.  Frankly, I hadn't even heard
> about git until a few weeks ago, although I'm familiar with svn and
> arch (of which I strongly prefer svn).  Has anyone made a comparison?

svn is not a distributed version control system (dVCS).  For that reason,
it wasn't even in the running for me.  As for why I chose git over hg
(I'd narrowed the choice to those two pretty early on), here's something
I wrote a few days ago:

    http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.maintainers/3380

In fact, that whole thread (long) makes good reading if you're reasonably
familiar with both git and hg.  Beware though, there are some
statements that make git look bad, but when we pushed for details,
none were forthcoming.

> I'm particularly interested in emacs support, external tools support
> (e.g., cvs2cl to produce changelogs, viewcvs.cgi for web browsing,
> statcvs e.g. <http://josefsson.org/gnutls/statcvs/>), authentication
> options (anonymous, ssh, etc), portability (Windows?).

Yes to all of that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)

> Support at Savannah may be a factor too.

Savannah does support git, thanks to the work by Sylvian Beucler:

  http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=summary