RE: How well does CVS handle other types of data?

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Wednesday, July 11, 2001 at 16:31:42 (-0400), Jeff King wrote: ]
> Subject: RE: How well does CVS handle other types of data?
>
> The difference is that CVS is an excellent tool for managing source code,
> because the VAST majority of cases involving concurrent editing of source
> code is automatically mergable, and in the case of conflicts it is easy to
> mark the differences between the files to make it easy to fix by hand. CVS
> is a poor tool for managing images, because concurrent editing of binary
> files such as images should always be avoided.

Concurrent editing in the sense that phrase is most commonly used with
CVS is not the only, or even the major, problem here!  This issue can
much more easily be avoided by external task management.

Merging of branches (which is a totally different form of concurrent
editing that's not necessarily temporally related) is the real issue.

-- 
                                                        Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>     <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;   Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs