On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 23:14:15 -0500 (EST), Sam Tregar wrote: >On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Matthew O. Persico wrote: > >>>This sounds like a really bad idea to me. >>What is so 'bad'? That is an awfully vague expression. > >You're right! Sorry. How about "hard" and "fragile"? What will >you do >when a new version of CVS comes out? > As long as the interfaces don't change (and hopefully they won't), it works. If there is new stuff, I don't get it until I update the perl. No worse than if I needed to do a system() to get the new funtionality
>>This is also a learning exercise. > >*shrug* Well, ok then. I hope you learn something good! > Already have. Seems the CVS is not libraryable in its curernt state. >-sam > >PS: have you seen mcvs? It's a system that adds versioning of >directory >structures to CVS. I believe it was done as a wrapper. See google >for >more information. > Thanks, I'll check. -- Matthew O. Persico
