Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 11:55:33 -0400 From: Duane Whitty <duane@greenmeadow.ca> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <200603041155.33813.duane@greenmeadow.ca> In-Reply-To: <20060304141957.14716.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060304141957.14716.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 04 March 2006 10:19, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com wrote: > --- Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des@des.no> ha scritto: > > Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> writes: > > > An alternative VCS may have > > > technical advantages (atomic > > > commits and versioned metadata > > > are the two main ones) but unless > > > it allows anyone to have a local > > > copy of the repository and > > > implements all the CVS read > > > commands (checkout, diff, > > > history, log, update) > > > indentically to CVS then it's a > > > drastic change. > > > > Subversion meets all your criteria. >> [--- snipped ---] Hi My apologies in advance if I am proceeding too far with an OT post. IANAE on VCSs but I have been doing a lot of reading of late concerning the differences between VCSs. I really believe SVN has some extremely compelling features but the way it does/does not do its tagging is, I believe, an important concern. If I understand correctly it is the whole repository that gets a version number and not individual files. Here is one of the URIs I used for information which is a feature summary and comparion (by no means exhaustive) between CVS and SVN. http://www.pushok.com/soft_svn_vscvs.php Best regards, --Duane
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200603041155.33813.duane>