At Mon, 01 Aug 2005 10:52:03 -0700, Donovan Baarda wrote: > > On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 23:54, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > >>>>> "BAW" == Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > BAW> So are you saying that moving to svn will let us do more long > > BAW> lived branches? Yay! > > > > Yes, but you still have to be disciplined about it. svn is not much > > better than cvs about detecting and ignoring spurious conflicts due to > > code that gets merged from branch A to branch B, then back to branch > > A. Unrestricted cherry-picking is still out. > > Yeah. IMHO the sadest thing about SVN is it doesn't do branch/merge > properly. All the other cool stuff like renames etc is kinda undone by > that. For a definition of properly, see; > > http://prcs.sourceforge.net/merge.html > > This is why I don't bother migrating any existing CVS projects to SVN; > the benefits don't yet outweigh the pain of migrating. For new projects > sure, SVN is a better choice than CVS.
Since Python is Open Source are you looking at Per Force which you can use for free and seems to be a happy medium between something like CVS and something horrific like Clear Case? Later, George _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com