(Mail sent by NicolasTrangez to clee kde org regarding KDE's move to Subversion)
Hey,
First of all: I'm no KDE dev, not even a KDE user, and I'm not following KDE's development too closely, so maybe the coming stuff is just nonsence 
I just read your blog entry of 02/19/05 on Planet Freedesktop regarding KDE's migration from CVS to SVN.
This is IMHO a very good thing of course, Subversion is great and beats CVS in several ways, but I guess you know that as well as I do 
I also had to move some CVS repository (not as big as the KDE one of course, it got 15 modules or so) once. After playing around with cvs2svn and some other script I found on the web, I decided to take CVS snapshots of the CVS repository once the devs of a certain module had made some release/important tag/... and just create a new SVN repo with this tag's code as revision 1, then removing write access from the specific CVS module. It took some time of course before all modules were migrated, but in the end the result was working quite nice. CVS read access was still permitted for several months (I guess KDE's CVS server will just stay up, you guys can't afford to take it down I guess? We didn't have the resources to do so 
and every project could continue working.
The pro's of the approach:
- we could start using the more flexible SVN auth system (mod_authz_svn)
- it allowed us to remove access from developers that were not active anymore
- all pro's SVN offers (no more pserver, jay)
Con's:
- Takes a while to migrate
Lack of good web frontend, exposing all features SVN offers (dunno if there's a really good frontend now, we used viewcvs-dev, which didnt offer 100% functionality, and needs access to the raw repository files
unlike chora) - Devs need to get used to SVN instead of CVS, although this didnt take too long.
Just my small experience
Good luck with it,
Ikke http://www.eikke.com