Yes Eric you are right but it is one of the options.
My preferred way is the "archive by reference" as done by MKSSI and then
using m$word to diff the files.
Since the company is using all types of templates as a matter of policy and
they all have macros, saving in RTF is not an option. But when not at work I
use either emacs or sitepad and save everything as HTML or SGML depending on
how it will be published.
Mike.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Siegerman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: May 17, 2001 2:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: handling of MsWord-Documents in CVS ?
On Thu, May 17, 2001 at 09:16:31AM -0400, Echlin, Michael wrote:
> The problem with binaries (and word files are binaries [...])
> [...]
> 6: hack cvs so that it uuencodes and decodes binary files on checkin and
> checkout.
This wouldn't help at all (the deltas would still be huge), and
it would probably be dangerous (you still couldn't do a
meaningful merge, but CVS might try anyway, and end up corrupting
the file).
Better would be to hack CVS so that it uses xdelta
(http://www.xcf.berkeley.edu/~jmacd/xdelta.html) as its
underlying storage format. There was a thread here not too long
ago about the pros and cons of that.
--
| | /\
|-_|/ > Eric Siegerman, Toronto, Ont. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| | /
With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not
necessarily a good idea.
- RFC 1925 (quoting an unnamed source)
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
