Torbjörn Axelsson wrote:
>"Gianni Mariani" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Rasku, I've wondered why they have not been used too.
>>
>> RFC2396 - http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2396.html
>>
>
>That RFC was written in August 1998.
>
>Please consider that CVS early history began in 1986 and stabilized as
>a a program on its own (if still heavily relying on rcs and diff among
>others) in 1991.
>
>Perhaps one day people there will come a CVS version 2 that drops
>backwards compatibility completely, works on top of any database
>system and has neat plugins (CORBA[1]?) for different access methods
>but until then the format for the CVSROOT should basically be at least
>backwards compatible.
>
I am not sure what you mean by backwards compatible. If you support both
formats for a few versions then you can still use workspaces that used the
old format. You could even modify CVS to re-write the CVS/Root files to
the new format.
--
Stephen Rasku E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Software Engineer Web: http://www.pop-star.net/
TGI Technologies
_______________________________________________
Bug-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs