On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 01:05:21PM -0500, Angelo Bertolli wrote: > > I did do a lot of surfing a few years ago on which one to use. I read > comparison charts, etc. I ended up having to use both. And my > impression was, "why did everyone make such a big deal about which one > to use? They seem almost identical." I think to the novice it seems > more like a big deal is made, also because a novice will probably not > see the differences very much anyhow. > I think the big deal was made over the following key issues: - cvs is basically abandonware (all the devs went on to create svn) - cvs is insecure (svn can be also, but it supports multiple secure transports) - if you generally *like* cvs, then svn is a piece of cake Now, there are plenty of people who hate cvs and likewise hate svn, but in general, people prefer svn over cvs. Now, if you are a fan of arch or bitkeeper or some other more distributed SCM tool, then neither cvs nor svn will meet your needs. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature