On Sat, 2003-03-22 at 10:44, Mike Simons wrote: > On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 08:21:15AM -0800, Peter Jay Salzman wrote: > > cvs remove thisI<tab> > > rm thisI<tab> > > > > rather than what cvs forces you to do: > > cvs rm -f thisI<tab> > > ...doesn't seem so hard.
It's not too bad, but you can't delete directories and there is no support for moving files/directories except 'by hand'. > > i've always been impressed with linux's tendency to make things super > > convenient for programmers. but cvs runs counter to this. it's almost > > as if it was developed with no user input to the developers. > > CVS was developed by developers. Major weaknesses include handling of > directories, renaming of files, tracking permission bit across versions, > non-atomic commits, no concept of "change sets" (a changes to multiple > files are a single change), backout of single changesets, and handling > decentralized master archives. > > > i'm sure there are cvs replacements out there. i'm wondering if > > anybody has ever played around with one? make suggestions? > > I have heard of three alternatives that are non-commercial but have > not played with any of them extensively: > > - Subversion (is a group that forked CVS with the > intention to make it suck less) Are you sure about that? I thought Subversion was a totally separate project that started from scratch. I think you may be thinking about a different project that was posted to /. the other day. > - Arch (is a sh/ftp based system which supports distributed master > archives and some concept of change sets) > - Bitkeeper (has funky semi-commercial dual mode license, very powerful, > I'd be worried about the stability of the maintainer). > > There are also a bunch of fully commercial packages... > > I would investigate Arch and Subversion in that order... then I would go Subversion first. From what I understand, Arch is just a proof-of-concept script developed by a single person and now somewhat stagnant. Subversion is in active development. I've used subversion a little bit and I've found it to be very nice. You only need to rename a directory once before you begin to appreciate it over CVS. dave
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
