On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Mike Swanson wrote:
Paul M wrote:
On 23/06/2009, at 6:44 AM, Fernando Quintero wrote:
Hello list,
I have a question:
I was reading about version control systems and i found a lot of the
distributed software "with best performance", but really i don't know much
about it.
There are some technicals or philosophicals reasons why the OpenBSD
repository does not change to something other than CVS?
You seem to make the assumption that _everything_ else is better than CVS.
This may be your opinion, but that's all it is.
paulm
Well, I suppose it is better than RCS or SCCS, and in some small ways,
CVS even did things right that SVN gets wrong (namely, tags). But to
imply that CVS is better than (or equal to) Mercurial or Git is a bit
ridiculous :)
http://www.openbsd.org/why-cvs.html
Because none of the above mentioned will allow for 70+ developers to
update ~1.2GB/~140,000 files of source code, allow anonymous checkouts,
has an available web based interface and interfaces with ssh. Instead
though non atomic commits, expensive branches and almost 20 years of
work arounds are utilized.
Eugenio.
