Re: Source code control

Nobody talked about subversion in this thread, and I'm not sure why...

I haven't used it, only considered it for future projects after reading the 
docs. But the concept was to make a cvs replacement, with its advantages and 
without its hassles/disadvantages. Last time I checked, the apache project was 
seriously considering moving to subversion, so it can't be that bad. Oh, and the 
license is Apache/BSD, just for comparison with the bk/arch crossfire... ;-)

I also found a brief comparison of version control systems, for the 
decisionmakers:

http://better-scm.berlios.de/comparison/comparison.html

Fernando

Source code control

[Bryan O'Sullivan]

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 05:17, [e-mail] wrote:
> Nobody talked about subversion in this thread, and I'm not sure why...

I get the impression that people would like to move to a fully
distributed revision control system, which svn isn't.  It's also
appallingly complex for the job it does.

<b

Source code control

[e-mail] writes:
> Nobody talked about subversion in this thread, and I'm not sure why...

It's not distributed.  Multiple repositories are hard.
LinuxBIOS development is inherently distributed, and needs
multiple repositories.
> http://better-scm.berlios.de/comparison/comparison.html

Thanks it is an interesting comparison.

Eric