begin  quoting Wade Curry as of Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 10:49:04PM -0700:
> Lan Barnes([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Sun, Jun 04, 2006 at 08:53:03AM -0700:
> > 
> </snip>
> > 
> > CVS is so broken it is technically inferior to RCS.
> 
> I'm surprised by this remark for the obvious reasons that have
> already been brought up by Greg.  I'm curious in what ways you
> meant that RCS is better.

Normally I don't discount out of hand anything Lan says -- he's a sober,
thoughtful sort of guy.  But he really, really, really loathes CVS. I
can't seem to figure out why, so I try not to spin him up about it too
often.  It just annoys him and confuses me. However...

About all I can think of for a reasonable explanation as to why Lan
is so unhappy with CVS is that he's been burned by CVS being good 
enough so that people try to build a real SCM system on top of it,
repeatedly.  And it falls down.  On his head.

To venture into the car-analogy realm, then...

CVS is a tractor... and to people who want sports cars, it's ugly, slow,
top-heavy, and lacks basic features like bucket seats, seatbelts, turn
signals, and brake lights, etc.

And if you ask for a sports car and get handed a tractor with some
pinstriping, you're naturally going to get a little irate.  When a
bunch of hicks on tractors express contempt at your dismay, you're
going to have a hard time explaining that you're not asking for low-
profile tires in addition to the pinstriping without sounding a bit
rabid.

For 99% of what I want to do, CVS does the right thing. But I suspect
that I'm a hick on a tractor compared to what Lan is trying to do.

I still haven't figured out where the decentralized version control
systems fit into my little analogy.  So don't push it too hard. :)

-- 
_ |\_
 \|


-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to