I had this exact conversation with Mark Aufflick yesterday - I don't think the "pre-beta" status of svn is really an issue for stability and repository safety (svn FAQ
, some deployed sites
). The problem is that they don't issue binaries and they're not guaranteeing client/server interoperability over more than a (3-week or so) release cycle, so everyone
who currently works on OACS through CVS rather than release tarballs would need to start building svn client software and keeping it in sync with what is being run on the OACS repository. It's doable, and probably not that
much of a problem for the companies and individuals who are the core of OACS development, but it places a burden on newcomers and casual developers that could well drive them off.
which sucks, because CVS blows goats and subversion fixes the bits that suck while keeping the familiar CVS UI...
If there's any interest in following this sort of path I'll find out what the actual (rather than "supported") level of compatibility is between cross-version clients and servers...