Re: what's missing from CVS? extending CVS?

[Matthias Scheler <tron%zhadum.org.uk@localhost>]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 06:03:29AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
>  > I disagree about the order of importance. "tree-wide" atomic commits
>  > would e.g. my number one.
> Hrm. It's never seemed to me to be that big a deal in practice. It's
> certainly nice to never end up with an inconsistent checkout, ...

That's not what I'm after. Perforce assigns a changelist number to
very (atomic) submit (in CVS terms: commit). This changelist number
is visible on each revision of a file. And you can ask Perforce
for all the files changed by the submit (and their diffs) with a
single command. This is much more convenient that looking up
commit message on "mail-index.netbsd.org" to find what else was
changed by a commit.

> ... doesn't hamper development like the lack of rename does.

I'm sorry but I don't understand why you think that rename is important.
Perforce doesn't support rename. You do it by copy (which preserves
the history if done properly) and delete. I've done that a few times
and I fail to see the disadvanteges compared to a real rename.

>  > There is however at least one thing I would like to add:
>  > 
>  > - merge tracking
> Yes, totally. Do you know if any of the free systems do a decent job
> of it?

No, I don't know any decent free system. I'm just spoiled by Perforce.
But to be fair: I don't think Perforce would be an option for us even
if we could get a free server license and a client for all the platforms.

        Kind regards

-- 
Matthias Scheler                                  http://zhadum.org.uk/