Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 22:14:47 +0100 From: Divacky Roman <xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> To: Ollivier Robert <roberto@keltia.freenix.fr> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <20060306211447.GA93464@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> In-Reply-To: <20060306102921.GC21025@tara.freenix.org> References: <20060304173917.X61086@fledge.watson.org> <20060304180131.69997.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20060305084713.GA97196@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <20060306102921.GC21025@tara.freenix.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 11:29:21AM +0100, Ollivier Robert wrote: > According to Divacky Roman: > > I do agree that cvs has its drawbacks but there is OpenCVS (cvs > > reimplementation by openbsd folks) which seems to be actively maintained and > > its authors promised things like atomic commits etc. > > When ? Just having atomic commits is not enough. If you take the HEAD of > cvs right now (1.12.*), you get a "commit id" generated for all commits. > > > I think that switch from gnu cvs to opencvs is painless and should be done > > (once the opencvs is in usable state) because > > VCS migration is too heavy to switch to just CVS+epsilon. opencvs and gnucvs uses exactly the same data format so you can use either tool to access the repo. so the switch is painless.. I think its similar to switching from gnu tar to bsdtar.. roman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060306211447.GA93464>