[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [OT] CVS vs. SVN



On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 10:01:05PM -0600, Russell L. Harris wrote:
> 
> It's really not a matter of a repository version number being applied
> to all files in the repository.  Rather, think of the repository
> version number in terms of a snapshot of the repository at a
> particular moment in time.
> 
Bascially, every checkin automatically tags the repostiry with a one-up
numerical tag :-)

That is how I think of it to myself.

> It's easy to become accustomed the SVN concept of repository version,
> as opposed to the CVS system of file version.  The concept is
> particularly nice when the repository is backed up on a regular basis.
> I backup to a set of flash memory sticks which are rotated.  I tag the
> flash device with the repository version (such as #594), which is the
> only version number of which I need to keep track.  The concept also
> is nice for projects (such as software development) in which the
> revision level of the system is of more significance than is the
> revision level of the various files which comprise the system.
> 
> I was intimidated by the compexity of CVS; but Subversion was easy to
> learn.  There is good documentation at http://subversion.tigris.org,
> and there is an on-line book by O'Reilly.
> 
The book is a must read and is free (as in beer and speech), so there is
no excuse not to read it, other than claiming to not have enough time.

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: