From: Francesco M. <f18...@ya...> - 2006-04-05 13:59:44
|
Angelo Mandato ha scritto: > It seems to be that there should be a hybrid of the two. It sounds like > SVN addresses the problem where one file in CVS may have been updated > for version 2.0 of what ever while other files are for version 1 and you > end up reverting back versions till you find the right file for that > version. > > On the other hand, CVS seems ideal for well matured development where > the project is no longer undergoing major changes. I think SVN is good to handle these kind of projects, too ;) > There is one fact though, I hesitated from using CVS for a long time > because I was unable to grasp the concept quickly. Though I did > eventually figure it out many other developers just throw their hands up > and walk away from contributing to open source projects. I got a friend > who rewrote and optimized the code for reading and writing files in the > id3lib C project but he just doesn't want to learn CVS to check them > in. I think the SVN has potential to attract other contributors. I agree: I think SVN concepts are (slightly) easier to understand (like one revision number for each commit, even if it span more than a single file, etc). But indeed, tools required to use SVN are easier to setup. E.g. I remember that when I started to use CVS I had trouble with setting up (at that time I was using windows) tortoisecvs/wincvs + plink + pageant... With SVN it's easier: svn co https://svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/mathstudio/trunk mathstudio and IIRC on windows it requires only tortoiseSVN and not also an external tool like putty suite... Francesco |