Vince Mulhollon (2001-09-07 12:21:30 -0500) : > On 09/07/2001 11:20:42 AM Andrew Suffield wrote: > >>> But futile and misguided. CVS has whole swathes of fundamental flaws, >>> largely historical. Better to integrate with something similar to CVS > > References? Just curious what the huge problems are. It fundamentally > seems to work, or at least I've not yet run into any road blocks.
On <URL:http://subversion.tigris.org/> you can read a list of features that make Subversion better than CVS, which points to weaknesses in CVS: - Directories, renames and meta-data are not really supported in CVS; - Symlinks are not either; - Repeated merges (when you work on branches) are a PITA. These are real-life problems of CVS, not just theoretical weaknesses. One lives with it (I've been doing so for years), but one dreams of a day when they are no more problems. Roland. -- Roland Mas Je suis un anti-virus de signature. Copiez-moi dans la vôtre pour éliminer les virus de signature !