On Friday 24 Feb 2006 11:41, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > (die cvs ! DIE !)
Hey, it's served us well over the years. A fun thing to do with new technologies that claim to replace old ones is to imagine that the new one had been invented first and the old one was the replacement. Would you be able to sell the old technology on the basis of its advantages (at least to some people) over the new? For example, I think you can make a case for VHS (or even better in theory, Betamax) video tapes as a user-friendly replacement for DVD. Instant record function with easy incremental updates and relatively good reliability; smooth linear search function with a continuous visual update; remembers its playback position between uses; larger capacity; more robust (the tapes degrade more gracefully and are much harder for a toddler to destroy completely). Downsides: bulky to store, picture and sound quality not as good, omits some (generally worthless) extra-features crud, although also some potentially essential things like captioning, harder to seek to predefined positions. Sounds like a reasonable tradeoff. I know which one I prefer to use day to day, and it's not DVD. (An inclination that got us into trouble recently when we went on holiday to a rented cottage taking several kids videos with us, only to find they only had a DVD player. I'd forgotten video was supposed to be obsolete.) Similarly, I could probably sell you FM as a significant improvement on digital radio. I'd struggle with LP records... I suppose I could try pointing out how much more crappy unwanted filler material you get on CDs that there wouldn't be room for on this nice low-capacity format. Probably couldn't make much of a case for CDs over your shiny iPod either, but that has more to do with their being too different to be easily susceptible to that sort of comparison. Anyway, this is all a wholly pointless digression, because what I was thinking was just that you can't make a case for CVS over Subversion. I can think of two advantages it has: working copies are half the size (Subversion stores a whole load of stuff in the .svn directories, which is handy because it means it can do diffs and status reports without querying the repository), and the repository is a bit easier to study directly if you need to. Not enough. Of course, I know where I've read this sort of thing before -- the Emacs reverse changelog, in which they try to re-cast all of the fixed bugs and new features as more interesting behaviour and slimmer code in the older version. What did they actually call that file? A quick search doesn't reveal it. > I'll make a dummy commit on one of the utility scripts and see what > happens. Is it supposed to post on rg-bugs like previously ? Yep, looks like that worked. Chris ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
