On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 21:23 +0200, KP Kirchdoerfer wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 30. September 2010, 20:56:16 schrieb Erich Titl: > > on 30.09.2010 15:43, Mike Noyes wrote: > > > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 14:16 +0200, Erich Titl wrote: > > >> at 30.09.2010 13:08, Andrew wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> So what exactly is missing and what do we gain by using another > > >> versioning system, given, I don't know git or mercurial, but I am > > >> missing some features of CVS in SVN (mostly automatic comment expansion > > >> in the code). > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software > > > > > > Note: CVS doesn't scale well on the server side (per SF staff). > > > CVS can't do diffs of binary files. > > > > As I said, IMHO binaries do not belong in a 'source' versioning system > > Everyone; > Mike; > > is there a place on SF not in cvs/whatever-versioning-system and not in FRS > to > put binaries (:=lrp packages)? > > I don't like the idea to clutter FRS more with about 170 packages.
KP, The FRS supports subdirectories now, so clutter shouldn't be a problem. However, the SF UI to the files in the FRS may. -- Mike Noyes <mhnoyes at users.sourceforge.net> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ SF.net Projects: leaf, sourceforge/sitedocs ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
