Add support for CVS

[guillaume.tardif@…]

As part of the VersioningSystemBackend changes, I think CVS should be part of the supported version control systems. Even if it is possible to use CVSTrac instead of Trac, this should not be a reason for not providing a Trac intergration with CVS.

CVSTrac doesn't provide all the functionnality (Roadmap for instance) and Trac is so nice it's a pain to move to any other tool for the same functionality. Trac would certainly gain a lot of audience if it had a CVS integration. I started to use Trac with Subversion, and I know work on another project where CVS is used, and moving to Subversion is not an option (at least not right now) ; we just have to live with this… and a Trac-CVS integration would make it easier.

[berserksangr@…]

CVS support would be great! I like Trac very much but don't want to use Subversion, mainly because of its poor (not of a production quality) Eclipse integration and lack of some automanaged fields that I need. I was thinking about Trac + CVSTrac mixing, but it's not a handy solution.

P.S. Thank you for your hard work.

[alexander.neundorf@…]

We are currently looking for a combined wiki+bug tracker, we already have webcvs installed. Now I found Trac and it would be great if it would support cvs too. I had a look at CVSTrac, but Trac seems to be much nicer.

Alex

[marcel.senf@…]

dito. cvs support would be really nice.

[cceska@…]

CVS Support would help us out - primarily because we have existing source repositories we are not interesting in moving over the SVN. Also the plugins for Eclipse and netbeans are weak.

[Christopher Lenz]

(Not sure why this was targetted to 0.10)

[grnch@…]

Any progress on this? I am sure that the seven people using Darcs/Bazaar/whatever are quite happy being supported by Trac, but how about the millions of real developers working on actual projects in CVS who have no option of switching the whole repository infrastructure just to use Trac?

[Christian Boos]

Strange that among the seven developers using Darcs/Bazaar/whatevercurial you can find 4 developers willing to spend their time developing a plugin for Trac, and that among the millions of real ones, there's no one ;)

Ok, to be fair, CVS is there since a long time, and you already have a lot of effective supporting tools for it (CvsTrac, ViewCvs, FishEye, …), so the incentive to support Trac is certainly less important…

Besides, I'm now closing this ticket as wontfix, as it's really not likely that a TracCvs plugin will be developed by the Trac developers. You can eventually ​request-a-hack for this, on the TracHacks community site.

In any case, if such a plugin gets ever written, one can still update that ticket to mention it.

[anonymous]

well. two years later, it sill makes sense to me to have CVS on trac.

NNE

[pr0t0s]

what! no cvs integration, thats absurd.

[Christian Boos]

You might want to have a look at CvsTrac ;-)

[anonymous]

Replying to pr0t0s:

what! no cvs integration, thats absurd.

or obsolete ;-)

[heppa]

@anonymous: only one that will always work on "from scratch" projects, with no history at all, and a complexity, that even Bill Gates could oversee can speek like this. There are tons of projects in production state, that will not be ported to SVN just because some developers SVN decided that they could talk of SVN of the new DeFacto standard, and could try to make CVS obsolete. Believe me, it's not that easy.

I will have a look at CVStrac, but I find a bit annoying that the still commonly used versioning system is not supported by this great tool. CVStrac does not support Continuous Integration backends, which would be very important for us as well. So there is the possibility to have Trac without CVS support or CVStrac without Continuous Integration support. It's just a pity!

[anonymous]

I want cvs backend :)

[anonymous]

We ALL want CVS backend! CVS was the mostly used VC system. How can you ignore it? :)

[Christian Boos]

For people still trapped with CVS, it should be easy to set up an incremental mirror to one backend supported by Trac:

• Mercurial's ​convert extension seems to support incremental conversion
• Git's ​git-cvsimport also
• but for Subversion, cvs2svn doesn't support incremental migration (​cvs2svn FAQ)

Note: in case anyone feel tempted, please don't add another comment like comment:20 or comment:21, it's useless and annoying (and anyway I'll delete them from now on).

[anonymous]

I had a shot at it. I can see commits in my timeline and tickets. Browsing is not (yet) supported. Might be a bridge too far for me (I have no python experience, no trac experience and only very basic cvs knowledge). Yet it might already be useful.

​http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/TracCvsntIntegrationPlugin

But we have CVSNT not CVS don't know if the loginfo hooks behave in the same way.