lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Kernel SCM: When does CVS fall down where it REALLY matters?
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:52:38PM -0700, Val Henson wrote:

> I strongly recommend that anyone attempting to make CVS a viable
> replacement for BitKeeper start out by actually using BitKeeper.
> You're so used to being crippled by CVS that you don't even know what
> you're missing.

Agreed. And I suggest anyone doing such a study investigate all
the different parts of bitkeeper, not just its file-management /
distributed repository features.

Little things make a lot of difference. Things like per-file
comments on checkins instead of a single per-checking comment.
And ease of use for some really mundane merge-tasks (See my earlier
mail in this thread for details)

It's only through actual usage patterns that you'll see all the
neat time-saving gizmo's in there.

--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.088 / U:0.276 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site