Re: Another anonymized posting.

[Matt Hargett <matt () use net>]

Rodney Thayer wrote:

> At 06:26 PM 6/9/2004 -0400, Dave Aitel wrote:
>
> > anonymized posting please:
> >
> > BTW, the way things are going, I'd consider switching to svn.
>
>
> and why?  what was the redeeming social value in CVS to begin with?
> automerge, which never worked?  claims of tree corruption, which
> were never substantiated?
>
> is there some reason you have an intense urge to have a server-based
> source tree mechanism to slow down development?  what's wrong with RCS?

Auto-merge works most of the time with small non-cowboy development 
teams who have componentized things decently and therefore don't do 
double edits. Clearcase does a better job IMO, but your complex shit 
statement below applies to it.

CVS and RCS are both differential based, which some people really don't 
like. They'd rather the client did the diffing, since that's where the 
smarts for different diffing approaches based on filetype should be 
done. This makes sense to me, but some people strongly disagree for some 
reason.

Of course, if you don't need diffs, branching, labels, post-commit 
triggers, etc then just tar up your source every x hours and untar in 
case of disaster. RCS vs CVS vs Clearcase vs Source(un)Safe vs 
Subversion vs SourceIntegrity vs whatever is not an incredibly useful 
discussion if the parties involved don't all have the same requirements 
of a change management system.



_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave