what is pcvs?
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Tobias Weingartner wrote:
> On Monday, March 6, Ben Leibig wrote:
> >
> > Well, I've tried as hard as I can, but I can't convice our developers that
> > RCS locking is not necessary when using CVS. They're all old school, and
> > they don't trust CVS's ability to merge, nor do they claim they need it.
>
> They'd rather step on each others toes, I understand. Well, for "RCS" style
> locking, have a look at 'cvs admin -l'. However, I doubt it does exactly
> what they/you want/need...
>
>
> > THey do however want the whole remote repository ability, which means I'm
> > in a hard spot. I need to figure out how to provide locking (every file
> > gets locked everytime it is checked out and unlocked everytime it is
> > commited.) Using CVS, or to provide a remote repository system using RCS.
>
> Ouch, good luck...
>
> > Actually the developers even want to have a copy of the checked out source
> > all running in one directory on one of the UNIX servers. When they check
> > out they want the file's permissions in that directory to change so they
> > can access it untill the check it back in, then they want it to go to read
> > only for everyone.
>
> Ahh, of course, since it's checked out just like the developers version,
> things will be locked, thereby getting no work done. Yes, I understand,
> they want an *exception*...
>
>
> > I'm not sure how possable any of this is. It seems
> > like what we really need is a client/server version of RCS. Anyone have
> > any advice, if nothing else can someone tell me how to do the locking. I
> > know this has come up before, but I don't really understand how the RCS
> > lock works, nor if it still works with CVS 1.10.8.
>
> I'm sorry, I don't know how to help you. Maybe PCVS, Aegis, SourceSafe,
> or whatever other thing out there, will have what these developers think
> they need...
>
> --Toby.
>
