From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 4 16:26:42 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 800C616A420; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 16:26:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC90D43D66; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 16:26:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02C92081; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 17:26:29 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Learn: ham X-Spam-Score: -2.4/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on tim.des.no Received: from xps.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by tim.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CDA42080; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 17:26:29 +0100 (CET) Received: by xps.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 796FE33C4C; Sat, 4 Mar 2006 17:26:29 +0100 (CET) From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Duane Whitty References: <20060304141957.14716.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200603041155.33813.duane@greenmeadow.ca> Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 17:26:29 +0100 In-Reply-To: <200603041155.33813.duane@greenmeadow.ca> (Duane Whitty's message of "Sat, 04 Mar 2006 11:55:33 -0400") Message-ID: <864q2erxai.fsf@xps.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110003 (No Gnus v0.3) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: arch@freebsd.org, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 16:26:42 -0000 Duane Whitty writes: > 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. That is also the case for Perfoce. > 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 The author's claim that Subversion does not have tags is incorrect. Subversion implements tags in the same manner as it implements branches: through namespace operations. A tag is actually a branch which the developers agree not to commit to; this may seem strange, but can actually be advantageous in the rare-but-not-unheard-of case where we need to "slide" a tag, since Subversion will maintain a history of that slide. The author also does not understand the point of Subversion's file properties. Subversion has a single, consistent mechanism for storing metadata, and unlike CVS, those metadata are versioned. The types of metadata stored by Subversion include: - execute bit (svn:special) which is not well supported in CVS - mime type (svn:mime-type) and character set (svn:charset) which CVS does not support at all. Subversion uses a file's mime type to determine if it is text or binary; CVS uses an unversioned flag (b) in the ,v file. - ignored files in a directory (svn:ignore) for which CVS relies on a special file called .cvsignore. - any other information you which to place there; for instance, SVK uses svk:merged to keep track of which revisions have already been merged when you merge changes between branches. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no