On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 08:24:39PM -0500, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > Jeff Bailey wrote: > > I prefer svn over arch because svn seems to work close enough to cvs > > that I don't need to spend much time learning it. I also think that the > > upstream author of arch is an ass, but that should really be only a very > > minor consideration. =) > > I found I had almost zero trouble switching from cvs to svn (oh, except that > mysteriously I have to run 'svn up' before committing slightly more often > than I had to run 'cvs up' before commiting, but it's really fast, so I > don't mind).
This should dispel the mystery: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/svnbook/apas02.html Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
