Re: [Squeak-VMdev] SourceForge or SqueakForge?

[<gor...@bl...>]

Hi!

Ned Konz <ne...@bi...> wrote:
> On Thursday 11 November 2004 7:13 am, Ian Piumarta wrote:
> > ¾ ¾With CVS, both branches and working dirs are cheap. ¾Not so with
> > ¾ ¾darcs: every branch and working dir costs at least two full trees.
> >
> > ¾ ¾The reason why people (me included) love CVS is that CVS is safe.
> > ¾ ¾There is no way you can ever lose data that has been committed without
> > ¾ ¾doing manual surgery on /var/cvs/. ¾This gives you a peace of mind
> > ¾ ¾that is difficult to understand if you haven't been exposed to CVS.
> 
> And from my point of view:
> 
> I use CVS from four or five different operating systems. I have clients on all 
> of them that are stable. On my (main) Linux machine, I have more CVS clients 
> than I remember. Even on my Windows box I have two different CVS clients.

I agree that darcs lack GUI clients. That is of course an issue. But it
probably does have stable clients for all your OSes.

> CVS over SSH works, and I can set it up without opening another hole in my 
> firewall.

Darcs uses SSH too. No problem. And it is even better in this respect
since it uses HTTP for publishing.

> Our model of development is actually quite well suited to what CVS provides. 
> As Ian points out, we hardly have a chaotic model. Plus, our artifacts are 
> all relatively small files in trees, which is exactly what CVS deals with the 
> best.

Well, I would still say darcs is a lot better. :)

> My main complaints about CVS are:
> - branches and merging can be confusing, depending on how much you use CVS and 
> how good your client program is

Indeed, and this seems to be a very strong point of darcs. I have been
struggling with branch merges in CVS in a big project a few years back
and it was pretty nasty.

> - pserver sucks from a security point of view, but you don't have to use it 
> (or you can provide it just for read-only uses like SF does)

Not a problem with darcs.

regards, Göran

PS. Who knows, perhaps we can even play with having both? I mean, I
could set up a non-official darcs-repo that is a mirror of the CVS repo.
Sure, people wouldn't be able to commit into the official CVS repo using
darcs directly - but I think you can work around that quite easily. This
way people could play with it.