[evs] Does EVS remove some of CVS limitations?

Eric B. ebenze at hotmail.com
Fri Feb 8 14:08:25 GMT 2008

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 sales@march-hare.com.

"Arthur Barrett" <arthur.barrett at march-hare.com> wrote in message 
news:fogtj6$j2f$1 at paris.nodomain.org...
>> Agreed, but you'll forgive me for saying so, but that seems like a very 
>> closed-minded approach.  One of the great sounding things about EVS is 
>> that it seems to be incredibly flexible and allows for a lot of different 
>> interaction between different types of applications.  One of the ways 
>> that I would see this as being open architecture would be to provide the 
>> ability for other web applications (such as Bugzilla, Jira, Wikimedia, 
>> Confluence, Fisheye, etc, etc, etc) to comunicate directly with EVS 
>> instead of needing to parse log files, read the repository DB, etc....
> Quite the opposite - we've written a C++ API that works terrific.

True, but unless I miss my guess, the C++ API will require that both apps 
live within the same server, which is typically not the case when talking 
application deployment at the enterprise level.  Of course, as you said, 
this is definitely not a "make it or break it requirement", so I wouldn't 
expect to see it in R1, although I do expect it would make a nice addition 
from the overall flexibility and adoption standpoint.

> Other people can of course create other API's.

True again.  Time will tell how fast EVS adoption rate will be in the 
market.  It took SVN probably about 3-4 years before it began making real 
instreams into the market, but since then, the adoption rate has been 
frighteningly fast & high.  I am utterly amazed at how many converts there 
have been in the last 1-1.5 years, transitioning from CVS to SVN.  I get the 
feeling that one of the reasons was due to the perception that CVSNT 
development had "stalled", whereas SVN appeared to be a lot more active.  To 
be honest, when I look around at the CVS newsgroups (boh dev and user), 
things have quieted down significantly in the last couple of years.  Even 
this EVS group doesn't seem to get enormous amounts of traffic yet.

I also suppose part of the reason of ppl migrating to SVN may be because it 
seems that it is more of a Open Source, collaborative project, with many ppl 
coding and contributing, whereas with CVSNT/EVS, the impression that it is 
primarily you and Tony who are working on them and not nearly as many ppl 
from the community.

>> It's a shame you didn't choose Java as the language of choice for EVS 
>> given all the OSS libs and frameworks that could have helped make 
>> development easier.  (yes - I have become a Java convert over the last 
>> years).
> Two of the requirements that excluded Java are:
> * high-performance
Yes - indeed that is a slight hinderance.  Although in all due fairness, 
with the speed of today's procs Java performance has increased 
significantly, to the point where it is no longer a hinderance.

> * ease of deployment (no Apache or other 3rd party apps other than the 
Pros and cons to this of course.  Pro is no dependency on any other apps. 
Con is the need to build everything yourself instead of leveraging all the 
time and work and that hundreds of ppl have put into developping stable 
things before you.  In addition you end up getting a "free" extended feature 
set with minimal amount of work involved.



More information about the evs mailing list