[vox-tech] cvs questions - replacement

[Peter Jay Salzman]

begin Mike Simons <msimons@moria.simons-clan.com> 
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2003 at 08:21:15AM -0800, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> >    cvs remove thisI<tab>
> >    rm thisI<tab>
> > 
> > rather than what cvs forces you to do:
> 
> cvs rm -f thisI<tab>
> 
>   ...doesn't seem so hard.
 
nice!  not documented in the man page, and i don't remember seeing that
in the coriolis cvs book.   although, now that i check, i see it in the
info page.  thanks!

but even so, something as renaming a directory is an utter nightmare.
even renaming a file is very inconvenient.

> > i've always been impressed with linux's tendency to make things super
> > convenient for programmers.   but cvs runs counter to this.  it's almost
> > as if it was developed with no user input to the developers.
> 
>   CVS was developed by developers.  Major weaknesses include handling of
> directories, renaming of files, tracking permission bit across versions,
> non-atomic commits, no concept of "change sets" (a changes to multiple
> files are a single change), backout of single changesets, and handling
> decentralized master archives.
> 
> > i'm sure there are cvs replacements out there.   i'm wondering if
> > anybody has ever played around with one?   make suggestions?
> 
>   I have heard of three alternatives that are non-commercial but have 
> not played with any of them extensively:
> 
> - Subversion (is a group that forked CVS with the 
>               intention to make it suck less)
> - Arch (is a sh/ftp based system which supports distributed master
>         archives and some concept of change sets)
> - Bitkeeper (has funky semi-commercial dual mode license, very powerful,
>              I'd be worried about the stability of the maintainer).

i've heard of subversion and bitkeeper.  i think bitkeeper is what linus
torvalds uses for kernel development.

but i was hoping to get some user feedback on the alternatives.  for the
next few months, i need to be more of a linux user rather than a linux
tinkerer, if you get my drift.  at least until my dissertation and book
are done.

>   There are also a bunch of fully commercial packages...

heh.  ;)

>   I would investigate Arch and Subversion in that order... then
> Bitkeeper...
> 
>     Let me know what you find,
>       Mike Simons

ok - i'll invest a little time.  before i do, why would you suggest arch
before subversion?  i would've thought the opposite order.

thanks mike!
pete

-- 
Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D