Kent Loobey wrote: > What do you think it does better than CVS?
1. CVS does not provide atomic updates. If I'm checking in two files, you can check them out at the same time and get the newer version of one and the older version of the other. SVN gets this right. 2. Patrick already mentioned directory versioning. CVS does a really poor job of handling deletions, additions, and renames of files. SVN gets this right. (At least it tries really hard. Until we have some real use experience, we won't know for sure.) Those are the big ones. SVN is also more efficient and designed to be distributed from the start. (CVS dates from the time sharing era.) -- Bob Miller K<bob> kbobsoft software consulting http://kbobsoft.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
