Changing the past in svn requires dumping the database and reloading a modified version. Possible but not trivial.
For git, rebase could be considered changing the past, or at least reinterpreting it. On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Adam Thompson <athom...@athompso.net> wrote: > I'm looking for a distributed VC system where even remote clients with > full(?) write access cannot, or at least would find it fairly difficult to, > alter history? > > AFAIK: > rcs - trivial to change the past (also not distributed, and NFS is > undesirable). > cvs - reasonably easy to change the past, usually. > svn - definitely possible (AFAIK) to change the past. > bzr - unknown > hg - unknown > git - unknown > everything else - unknown. > > For this application, a file-oriented system would be preferred over a > snapshot-oriented system like git. > > I'm trying to combine (soft) WORM-like properties with the benefits of a > version control system. Does not need to be utterly secure, merely needs > to be "good enough" to deter both script-kiddie level attackers and > inebriated sysadmins. > CVS would be ideal except that access control is AFAIK basically ternary > (none,read,write). > > Should ideally be in packages or ports, obviously. We have a bunch of > version control systems in ports that I've never even heard of before! > > Suggestions on which one I should learn how to configure? > > -- > -Adam Thompson > athom...@athompso.net > > -- Christopher Vance
