Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 21 Jun 2000 22:25:15 -0700
From:      Arun Sharma <adsharma@sharmas.dhs.org>
To:        tlambert@primenet.com
Cc:        smp@freebsd.org
Subject:   source control (Was Re: SMP discussion moving to freebsd-smp)
Message-ID:  <200006220525.WAA29645@sharmas.dhs.org>
In-Reply-To: <200006211654.JAA28545@usr08.primenet.com>
References:  <200006211654.JAA28545@usr08.primenet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 16:54:28 +0000 (GMT), Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> wrote:
> > Yes.  I agree.  I have no problems with it being bolluxed up for 1 day
> > or 1 week or even if it will gain us a lot, 2 weeks.  Beyond that, it
> > becomes too painful for me to use the tree.  I susepct others would
> > agree with threasholds in this general area, some tigheter some
> > looser.
> 
> Too bad the source code control tool that FreeBSD uses doesn't
> support multiple lines of developement.

AFAIK, you can have multiple branches in cvs. You probably meant, it
doesn't support multiple lines of developement _well_ ? Or am I 
overlooking some obvious shortcoming of cvs ?

At work, we use perforce. The nice thing (which cvs doesn't have)
about it is that it has a concept of a changeset.

Any extended discussion is off topic here, I think. I don't mind 
offline email though :)

	-Arun


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006220525.WAA29645>