| 1 |
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I think that indeed subversion is superior to CVS, especially on the part |
| 4 |
> where you want to look at changesets and merging. Maybe we could test |
| 5 |
> subversion, but we might want to wait until the 1.0 version is released |
| 6 |
> for actual use (is going to be rather soon now) |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
not to start a debate on their respective merits, but you might want |
| 9 |
to consider arch instead. subversion is cvs, only more so. arch is |
| 10 |
truly for distributed development, and has wonderful support for |
| 11 |
merging (cf. star-merge). |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Cheers, |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
-- |
| 16 |
Denys Duchier - Équipe Calligramme - LORIA, Nancy, France |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives