On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 7:13 AM Tomasz Rola <rto...@ceti.pl> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 08:49:38PM -0300, Gustavo Rios wrote: > > Hi folks! > > > > I have a simple question: is cvs still relevant today ? Would you start a > > project today using cvs ? > > To many the answer would be that git is relevant and cvs is not. Good > for them, but I think their talk would have been different if they had > to manage their own repo by themselves. The success of git owes a lot > to the fact that one can just click to get results while the > (hopefully) well paid admins and devs of git(lab|hub) take care of the > invisible part. > > In contrast to that, cvs is easy enough to be quickly understood and > used by oneself.
This is a silly argument though, and even incorrect. Git is not github or gitlab. One could easily have made a similar "cvshub" website. Git is a lot easier to administrate as a single user than CVS is, since the repo is completely self-contained in the project folder while CVS needs its own infrastructure set up in order to get started. However, with git it is also trivial to use local or remote servers if necessary - without involving a "paid admin". I really don't see where you're getting this from, or you have forgotten that CVS has a separate repository that must be administrated.
