Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
> indeed ViewVC can work with CVSNT without any problems. I only > don't see what this viewVC has to do with the question from the OP If ViewVC can work with CVSNT then so can bonsai, and whatever steps were taken to make ViewVC work with CVSNT are probably the same ones needed to make bonsai work with CVSNT. However the 'problem' is more fundamental than that: CVS needs a complex thing like Bonsai to track who changed what most recently - in CVSNT that information is in Audit - any Excel speadsheet can query it (via ODBC) and it should only take a perl or python progammer about 15 minutes to come up with a web page that can query the CommitLog table based on the standard Bonsai questions. If you look at Fabio's recent history of posts to the mailing list you will find that smartcvs get's a lot of mention, just like in the most recent post. I appear to have inflamed the situation by suggesting in several open posts on the newsgroup that if CVSNT is being used for a commercial purpose or for a wage earning activity that the orginisation/person should financially contribute to the development of CVSNT - especially if they have already shown they have money to spend on 'client' tools since keeping the server patched, fully open source and feature rich is somewhat business critical if it is storing your entire revision history. The reply argument (as I understand it) is that with a limited budget that some people may find that spending money on a 'rich GUI' is more urgent (to keep users 'happy) especially since CVSNT Server works so well and is open source (whereas the 'ideal' GUI appears to not be available without spending cash). To assist people with such limited budges March Hare Software give a rich client GUI away when you 'purchase' CVS Suite and that money goes directly to supporting the CVSNT programming effort - so you get the best of both worlds. And the arguments go on and on, which if you are really interested in you can read in the mailing list history. The bottom line is that according to the Free Software Foundation (GNU) the 'free' in 'free software' is about the 'freedoms' the license gives you, not about the price - in fact CVSNT costs $ 9,900,277 according to ohloh.net and users of 'free software' should expect to stump up hard cash for business critical software if they expect it to remain 'free' and supported and feature rich. The aim of us programmers who develop and maintain CVSNT is for 2% of people who download CVSNT to purchase a single copy of CVS Suite - which should be an easily achievable goal and if we achieve it we can triple our paid staff. Finally - if anyone has been using CVSNT server and comitted revisions then switching 'back' to CVS will possibly irreperably corrupt the repository the first time CVS writes to an RCS file (CVS makes no claims to be backwards compatible with CVSNT). Regards, Arthur