From owner-freebsd-current Sat May 1 13:10: 5 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from feral.com (feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4903214BEE for ; Sat, 1 May 1999 13:10:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mjacob@feral.com) Received: from feral.com (mjacob@feral.com [192.67.166.1]) by feral.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16902; Sat, 1 May 1999 13:09:39 -0700 Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 13:09:38 -0700 (PWT) From: Matthew Jacob Reply-To: mjacob@feral.com To: Harlan Stenn Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BitKeeper (was Re: solid NFS patch #6 avail for -current - need testers files) In-Reply-To: <19432.925584866@brown.pfcs.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > As I understand it, BitKeeper is indeed based on SCCS, and is a superset of > it. The performance hit of SCCS has been "solved". > > There are several "significant" commercial users of BitKeeper waiting for > the first production release, and Larry McVoy seems to be a bit of a maniac > when it comes to things being production stable. > > He said that a CVS->BitKeeper conversion tool is not far off. Cool! > > I'm mostly interested in the "lines of development" features, the ability > to check in various revisions of my *local* work, the ability to apply a > patch set as an atomic unit, and several of the GUI tools. > Amen to that.... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message