From: David E. <dec...@gm...> - 2006-02-27 19:05:08
|
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 01:22:05PM -0500, Ethan Blanton wrote: > Evan Schoenberg spake unto us the following wisdom: > > On Feb 26, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Ethan Blanton wrote: > > > once to the marginally better svn > >=20 > > I would argue that subversion is significantly better than cvs, not =20 > > 'marginally better' (though your point remains). >=20 > In many important areas it's not an improvement, which is why I make > this claim. It doesn't really fix branching and merging to speak of > (sure, branches are cheaper, but merges remain much more painful than > most distributed VCSs), and it doesn't help third-party developers > work with our sources beyond what CVS provides. My only significant experience is with CVS, Subversion, and ClearCase. So I'm curious to know of a tool that fixes these issues to your satisfaction, as I would be interested to read up on how it (and a distributed VCS) should work. Thanks. --=20 Encrypted Mail Preferred: Key ID: 8527B9AF Key Fingerprint: E1B6 40B6 B73F 695E 0D3B 644E 6427 DD74 8527 B9AF Information: http://www.gnupg.org/ = =20 ASCII ribbon campaign: () against HTML email /\ against Microsoft attachments Information: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html |