In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg A Woods (gaw) writes:
gaw> CVS can manage to keep track of some changes to some non-diff-able and
gaw> non-patch-able files, but only under a very few and very limited
gaw> circumstances.
no, it keeps track of all the changes. You never lose a change. What
it dosn't do is give you a friendly description of the change, as it
does in the form of a diff for a text file. One can imagine a system
which could:
cvs diff explanation.wav
Index: explanation.wav
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvs/CVS/skiing/explanation.wav,v
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -r1.3 explanation.wav
3.7 seconds
< [three second pause]
> [two second pase]
4.8 seconds
< [breath]
8.9 seconds
< /buk/
> /book/
but I know of nothing which will.
That is a lack, but it is not a big lack. And unless something else
you can point to _can_ analyse the difference between two images and
provide a human friendly description, then this lack in CVS is not an
argument for not using it.
>> What if there really isn't a right tool for the job? Then what do
>> you do?
gaw> Personally I would create (write, in this case) the tools I would need.
Write a diff program for GIFs or JAR files and work them into CVS.
Sounds like a lot of work for a trivial gain to me, but feel free.
But I am not going to lose the advantages of version control in a fit
of pique over not having a gif differ built into CVS.
Unless you can come up with a bigger problem with using CVS, you are
not going to convince anyone.
In brief, to support your case you need name something which does a
better job or even give a plausible description of such a thing.
--
Mail me as [EMAIL PROTECTED] _O_
|<
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
