[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Xdelta and CVS

From: Laird J. Nelson
Subject: RE: Xdelta and CVS
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 10:51:21 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden Behalf Of
> Greg A. Woods
> At one point back in the not so distant history of CVS (i.e. prior to
> RCS and diff integration) this kind of "replacement" of RCS would have
> been relatively easy (not trivial -- I actually investigated the level
> of difficulty a few years ago).  One need just change the
> implementation
> of the underlying RCS commands it used.  For example one could have
> dropped BitSCCS in and with a relatively few hacks to CVS and
> you would
> pretty much have built an SCCS-based CVS (BitSCCS has RCS command-line
> compatability).  With only slightly more hacks you could have built a
> CVS that used AT&T SCCS (or GNU CSSC, MySC, etc.).  If the hacks were
> done carefully you'd even end up with a CVS that could use either
> storage system, and maybe even any random tool with similar underlying
> capabilities.  Some of the hacks required would have revolved around
> branch numbering issues, keyword expansion differences, etc.

Hi, Greg; would that not violate the list of essential properties that
define what CVS is?  I seem to recall that in your opinion the RCS file
format is one of those things which makes CVS CVS, and that without it
CVS would no longer be CVS (which quite interestingly would make it
unique among all software products!).  I'm just curious because I'm
still trying to figure out what CVS is and what changes are permitted
IYO without sacrificing the name.  I must say your criteria are quite
interesting indeed!


Good, cheap, fast: pick two.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]