[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: giving up CVS
From: |
Thornley, David |
Subject: |
RE: giving up CVS |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Sep 2001 14:25:41 -0500 |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
>
> Using CVS to try to track changes to non-text files is a
> losing proposition,
> almost by definition.
>
Almost by definition, you lose the main reason for considering CVS.
This does not necessarily make it a losing proposition.
> CVS is quite literally less useful for tracking changes to non-text
> files than RCS alone can ever be.
>
Really?
Does RCS enable merging changes to non-text files?
Since it doesn't, what does it do better?
There are a lot of things CVS does better than RCS. CVS manages
concurrent development, branches, and works well by directory or
module rather than by file. By using non-text files, the concurrent
part goes out the window, and branches become less useful. The
rest of the advantages remain.
- Re: giving up CVS, (continued)
- Re: giving up CVS, Antonio Bemfica, 2001/09/14
- Re: giving up CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2001/09/14
- Re: giving up CVS, Paul Sander, 2001/09/14
- Re: giving up CVS, Greg A. Woods, 2001/09/14
- Demo of extensible merge (was Re: giving up CVS), Paul Sander, 2001/09/16
- Re: giving up CVS, Antonio Bemfica, 2001/09/15
Re: giving up CVS, Ron Alton, 2001/09/17
RE: giving up CVS, Helliwell, Matthew, 2001/09/14
RE: giving up CVS, Mark Hewitt, 2001/09/14
RE: giving up CVS,
Thornley, David <=
Message not available
Re: giving up CVS, Kaz Kylheku, 2001/09/15