This is not the cabal you're looking for.

====== Migrating ports from CVS to SVN ======

===== Pros/Cons =====

==== Pros ====

  * src has been migrated to svn a couple years ago now, ports/doc moving to cvs would make sense just for consistency's sake.
  * svn gives you a repo-wide revision that could greatly help the release process.
  * svn would make it possible to use more advanced dvcs (e.g. git-svn, hgsubversion).
  * no more repocopies necessary.

==== Cons ====

  * people don't like change.
  * svn checkouts tend to be bigger than cvs checkouts.

===== Third-party tools =====

==== Tools depending on CVS ====

  * pointyhat scripts

==== Tools that may depend on CVS ====

  * freshports (contact [[/DanLangille|DanLangille]])
  * portsnap (contact [[/ColinPercival|ColinPercival]])
  * cvsupd (only to update the underlying repository? contact?)
  * QAT (contact [[/IonMihaiTetcu|IonMihaiTetcu]])

===== Notes =====

  * Most of the recent issues I ([[/FlorentThoumie|FlorentThoumie]]) am aware of in src-land are related to the svn2cvs exporter. While core@ has decided to keep cvs as an option, portmgr@ could decide to ditch it altogether.

===== Testing phase =====

On 2011/04/20, I converted the cvs repository to subversion (using cvs2svn --trunk-only --encoding=iso8859_15, with default options, took just under 2.5 hours) and the results are:

|  | CVS | SVN |
| Checkout size | 629MB | 1.4GB |
| Repository size | 1.7GB | 12GB |