some hopefully heavy mogilefs development

[Brad Fitzpatrick]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 komtanoo.pinpimai at livetext.com wrote:

> >The SVN trunk is already on 2.0.  It's stable, we're using it in production
> >on LiveJournal.com.  Since you're starting a new project, I'd recommend
> >starting with MogileFS 2.0 if you're willing to help us test it and stress
> >it and look for any issues.
>
> Hi, my company is goinging to launch MogileFS within 1 months, I have done
> serveral tests with the CVS version, I also did some patches to the CVS
> code to solve of large-file and memory leak issues, 'coz the company is
> really paranoid of stability, they also want mysql-cluster, which looks
> scary to me. Right now, I'm pretty confident with CVS code+my patches,
> just want to know:
>
> 1. Which one is more stable, from SVN or CVS ?

svn.

I don't even know where the cvs is at.... we just migrated to svn one day
and left cvs there.  You should not use cvs.

> 2. Is it hard to migrate data from CVS version to SVN version in the future ?

Data format's the same.

> 3. Are there important bugs on the CVS code fixed in SVN ?

Maybe?  Nobody really knows where we left off in the cvs version.

Use svn trunk, or use released versions.

>
> thanks
> -kem
>
>