Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2006 09:47:13 +0100 From: Divacky Roman <xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> To: pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base) Message-ID: <20060305084713.GA97196@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> In-Reply-To: <20060304180131.69997.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060304173917.X61086@fledge.watson.org> <20060304180131.69997.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 07:01:31PM +0100, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com wrote: > Thanks Robert, > > there are many interesting points in your previous post. > > --- Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> ha scritto: > <snip> > > > > > And, don't forget that the author of svk is a FreeBSD user :-). > > > > :-). > > FWIW, I don't see Subversion, or any other alternative, replacing Perforce in > the short run, but I rhink it would be important to seek a replacement path for > CVS and it's weakneses (one of them... being basicly unmaintained and > non-evolving). 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. I think that switch from gnu cvs to opencvs is painless and should be done (once the opencvs is in usable state) because 1) its actively maintained 2) its BSD licensed 3) might have some features gnu cvs doesnt have roman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060305084713.GA97196>