On 18-12-2016 10:41, Lester Caine wrote: > CVS still has a number of plus features that github deliberately > destroyed in order to make supporting CODE a priority.
Git != GitHub. > When PHP project > was looking to move - yet again - Hg get the vote for a system that > worked better, but the 'github' marketing angle won the day - even given > it's know faults! So now I have an Hg/Mercurial setup locally, which > handles CVS, SVN and GIT transparently and allows working easily between > all four. BUT I would still prefer the clean way that CVS handled > modular project. GIT ( and actually Hg) still does not accept that > scripted languages and documentation is much better handled as a series > of inter-related projects rather than one all encompassing code base. > sub-repo's are frond on in both while CVS modules are still a perfect > solution, and projects that broke perfectly good CVS repositories into a > series of GIT repo's still have no tools to put the hwole back together > again. That is not really an argument against moving the documentation project given it is only one module. And technically git has submodules etc, but that is really a pain to work with, and I've never really had the need for something like that. -- Mark Rotteveel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Firebird-docs mailing list Firebird-docs@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-docs
