On Sunday, May 14, "Andy Glew" wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, I have never yet worked in a place where I was allowed
> to set up my own CVS server. Or, if I had control over my own machine,
> where my CVS server could network across the various intra-company
> gateways to all the places where I and others needed to access it.
> But, in that same company (which also happens to be the one Michael
> is working at) AFS went everywhere.
>
> Going client-server only will make CVS impossible to use for small,
> ad-hoc, users who are not officially supported by their companies.
> E.g. I use RCS for all of my personal files, .cshrc, etc. I was thinking
> of going to CVS, but if CVS is client server only, I will not be able to.
I'm only going to say this once. Yes, I realize that there is a real
world out there, and I realize there are all sorts of different, weird
and wonderful situations out there. However, I can't help but say:
"That's not my problem.", or maybe more to the point a question such
as "What are you doing working at a company in a not officially
supported role? Are you daft or stupid?!?". Now granted, *tons* of
people are going to jump down my throat for even conceiving such a
notion, but if your working environment sounds as bad as you make it
out to be, then you have worse trouble to worry about.
I don't mean to jump down people's throats, I was simply stating (in
the previous e-mail) what I found to be the "best" and more reliable
way to use CVS. I would have to agree that you are in a very
unfortunate situation, if your company does not wish to support you
and your developers in getting more work done faster, in whatever
way you wish to accomplish that.
--Toby.
Change the world, or it will change you. Your decision shall be final.
