When will CVS be replaced by modern version control system?

[Les Mikesell]

Jesse Keating wrote:
> 
>>> a) quick operations by avoiding round-trips to a remote server if
>>> not necessary
>>> b) easy branching and merging
>>> c) atomic operations
>>> d) co-maintainers (or maintainer apprentices) wouldn't need commit
>>> access to the main repository
>>> e) ability to do embargoed stuff like security fixes before they're
>>> public  
>> f) ability to rename things, especially handy for re-worked patches in
>> our context
> 
> I don't disagree that those things are nice with DVCS.  What I question
> is the amount of times they're necessary to warrant the extra
> complexity of a DVCS thrown at every user.
> 
> And still I continue to hear just features of dvcs, but not applied to
> a workflow for our Package vcs.

And in particular, they don't describe how that workflow ensures that 
the central build system knows that all distributed operations are 
synchronized and what happens if they aren't.  I assume that's a solved 
problem with these systems since they don't make much sense otherwise, 
but...

--
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com