• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

And what about Darcs?

 
Glenn Murray
Ranch Hand
Posts: 74
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I, for one, will not be an early adopter of a version
control system apart from CVS. However, I'm glad someone
else is taking the risk. Really the only annoyance with
CVS I've had is in refactoring directory layouts, although
I know others have their own complaints.

I wonder if in the end the best thing about Subversion or
Darcs will be that it prods the CVS maintainers into
enhancing CVS. I like the idea that CVS is a standard,
albeit unofficial.

Cheers,
Glenn
 
Alexandru Popescu
Ranch Hand
Posts: 995
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hi Glenn! I am using CVS for quite a while and I am happy with it. However this will not stop me for seeing some of its problems - from which some will not be considered afaik by the CVS developers. For some of them I know that there is a good explanation, for others there is not (f.e. moving files around).

--
./pope
[the_mindstorm]
 
Jeff Machols
author
Ranch Hand
Posts: 43
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
The good newss is there are plenty of people working on Subversion, like Apache. Moving files around is an advantage, but the idea of atomic commits can really help the code/release management.
[ January 18, 2005: Message edited by: Jeff Machols ]
 
Alexandru Popescu
Ranch Hand
Posts: 995
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
I fully agree that atomic commits are an important missing feature of CVS. Even emulating it costs a lot :-) (in hours/man).

--
./pope
[the_mindstorm]
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic