All of the points made in that page are right on. I can go on to say more:
- The modules database isn't versioned, which can affect reproducibility
requirements.
- The *info files accept a comprehensive list of sources on their command
lines, limiting their scalability. (After a branch merge on a very large
project, the command line buffer of the shell invoking the *info file
can overflow, causing breakage.)
- Triggers registered via the modules database are sometimes persistent,
causing suprises after modifications.
- The history file grows without bound, and can't be managed in any natural
way.
I'm sure I can go on if I think about this for a few minutes...
--- Forwarded mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Someone brought up a site on another mailing list about CVS and its
limitations and was citing this as a reason to not use CVS...what do you
all think about this? Some of this stuff I have personally witmessed
(i.e. large binary file problem, no directory versioning) but I'm
curious as to others opinions...
http://www.snuffybear.com/scm_grind_cvs.htm
--- End of forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
