On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 04:09:51PM -0400, Aaron S. Joyner wrote: > > Personally, I prefer and use RCS. It's super light-weight, really > straight forward, and I have a nice bash wrapper script around vim which > takes the tedium out of check in and check out.
Well, CVS is descended from RCS. CVS has a nice commit capability built-in that uses vi/vim by default. As an ex-RCS user I agree that its no-overhead-get-started-now aspect is attractive. But with a few canned commands, you can be up and running with CVS and you'll be using a mainstream tool instead of a relic. If you use RCS much, you'll soon find out about hanging lock files. You also have to check-out and check-in for every change. There is the problem of changing a file before checking it out. Then you have to save the changed file, co the file, diff and merge with the checkout file, then check in. I guess you could always have your files checked out, but there are problems with that scenario. With CVS, you import at time_0. Then you checkout your module. As you go you simply commit periodically - no more co-ci-co-ci etc. CVS is a little harder to get started but a lot easier in day-to-day use. -- Mike Moving forward in pushing back the envelope of the corporate paradigm. -- TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/ TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/ TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
