Apologies for responding to my own post, but I forgot to say that I use
svn for all new software, and will be pulling all my cvs controlled
software into svn at soem point. That is to say that my minor
discomfort is nothing compared to the additional capabilities provided
by subversion.
Brian Chrisman wrote:
I've used cvs and svn fairly extensively. I'm not completely
comfortable with the way branches are done in svn, but I can't find
anything other than "it's not what I'm used to from cvs" as a reason
for the discomfort.
I've looked at darcs quite a bit, and it theoretically looks like it
has a real advantage in merging disparate work (ie, stuff that would
create conflicts in other software may not do so in darcs). It isn't
designed as a client-server type of application, though you can make
web and procmail hacks to simulate such a thing. That lack of
centralization is a kinda scary proposal for the projects I generally
work on. :)
n a wrote:
CVS, Subversion, darcs, or GNU Arch?
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's
FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
