Oh...I see what you mean now... Yes, that wouldn't work exactly like
that without a local repo. Granted, making a local repo in SVN is super
duper simple and easy (especially compared to CVS), but that is still
two separate repos which is the whole problem.
I guess I've never worked on a project without actually working on the
project and therefore being able to commit. The readonly access was
throwing me off.
Ross D.
Donald J Bindner wrote:
The problem with CVS (and I thought SVN as well) is that it all
starts off with a 'cvs checkout' from the main author's archive.
Even if I start a new branch, I can't 'cvs commit' any of my
work because I'm not really a project member; I have read-only
access.
With Git, Darcs, and numerous others, I get a full local
repository when I do the original checkout. I can do commits
against my local repository (possibly in a different branch) and
be able to track the mainline at the same time. But I never have
to commit back to the main (read-only) project repository; my
commits are all local.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To get off this list, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with Subject: unsubscribe
-----------------------------------------------------------------
