On Sep 5, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:

> I should also point out that rubygems is on subversion and minitest  
> is on *gasp* perforce, so they should be considered counterexamples.
>
> Rake is, I believe, officially on git... and yet, it seems to have  
> had far fewer releases (barring compatibility fix releases) and  
> accepts far fewer contributions than minitest or rubygems.


Yes, rake is on git.  And since the move we have had more  
contributions from more diverse audience than before the switch.  I  
find it far easier to review potential patches now that we are using  
git.

I can't compare to any of your projects, but the lack of releases has  
more to do with my available free time than reflecting on the switch  
to git.

-- 
-- Jim Weirich
-- jim.weirich / gmail.com