Date: 19 Feb 2002 16:12:48 +0100 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: David Xu <davidx@viasoft.com.cn>, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patch sets to date and timing tests with Giant out of userret. Message-ID: <xzplmdpwln3.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202190120570.56008-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0202190120570.56008-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> writes: > It has good points and bad points > the bad point is that you can't work offline. > the good point is that development in different branches doesn't > slow each other down. (as it might in CVS). > It also keeps track of edits that touch multiple files as a unit. I'm working on porting the latest beta release of Subversion, which does all that and more, and has much better diff support than Perforce. After using Perforce for my PAM work, I've come to the conclusion that although it's a big step forward from CVS in one direction (change management & branching), it's a big step backward in almost every other direction. See http://www.tigris.org/files/documents/15/48/svn-design.html for details about the Subversion design. (in order to make a proper Subversion port, though, we need a port of the Apache Runtime - my port currently builds APR as part of the SVN build) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzplmdpwln3.fsf>