Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2006 15:19:57 +0100 (CET) From: <pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com> To: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <20060304141957.14716.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <868xrqscy1.fsf@xps.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> ha scritto: > Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> writes: > > An alternative VCS may have technical advantages (atomic commits and > > versioned metadata are the two main ones) but unless it allows anyone > > to have a local copy of the repository and implements all the CVS > > read commands (checkout, diff, history, log, update) indentically to > > CVS then it's a drastic change. > > Subversion meets all your criteria. > The reason why I mentioned subversion and not the handful of alternative VCSs around is that it is a natural evolution of CVS: I understand the main developer behind subversion also was one of the authors of CVS. Also their website says: "Subversion is meant to be a better CVS, so it has most of CVS's features. Generally, Subversion's interface to a particular feature is similar to CVS's, except where there's a compelling reason to do otherwise." I wanted to avoid turning this thread into a discussion of the different VCSs but perhaps that might be healthy. Many people like perforce... I wonder if the developer community would be happy to accept a "commercial" solution. Pedro. ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060304141957.14716.qmail>