[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: what's missing from CVS? extending CVS?
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 05:32:40PM -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> Brian Ginsbach <ginsbach%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 11:40:50AM -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> >> I don't think, architecturally, CVS can handle the requirements.
> >> CVS will never have easy/fast branching because branching requires
> >> that you touch every file in the repo. It is difficult to imagine how
> >> CVS would grow easy rename support or other features, either.
> > Granted I haven't used it but CVSNT seems to have rename support
> > and some of the other features that have been claimed difficult
> > for CVS to gain..
> CVSNT != CVS.
Hmm, that wasn't exactly my impression. Maybe architecturally. I know
I took a glance at the code a while ago and much is still the same as
the GNU version most seem to disparage.
> My understanding is that the way they've achieved the new features is
> by totally altering the architecture. The next version (with atomic
> commits) is to use a database back end, getting rid of the RCS files
Still wouldn't it be worth looking at it even if it is architecturally
Main Index |
Thread Index |