On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Matthias Andree <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 31.12.2012 21:40, schrieb Chris H: > >> IM(NS)HO; SVN is an inferior RCS created so Windows users wouldn't feel >> left out. > > No, and it has nothing to do with Windows. CVS does work on Windows. > > SVN 1.5 or newer is CVS done right, if you want the server-client split > model, and can waive the "distributed" nature of Mercurial, Git, or > Bazaar-NG. > > For those who abuse CVS as content distribution and management system to > just peek at individual files, it may not matter, and the pain of > migrating to SVN may dominate, but if you have ever manually assembled a > list of versions for how to merge because someone else branched in CVS > without laying proper tags, you know why CVS must be replaced.
It's completely laughable to try to put a "yet another dumbed down tool for windows users" label on Subversion. It's not. To the OP of this thread, do your homework before you make such claims. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
