On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 08:59:41 +0200, Francesco Paolo Lovergine <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]> said:
> On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 12:21:42AM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
>>
>> I don't care much, not being particularly familiar with either arch
>> or svn. If you ask me, it's cvs, but that has become unfashionable
>> of late.
>>
> svn is cvs with steroids. It has the advantage of being quite smooth
> in upgrading from cvs for the mean developer. AFAIK arch is
> under-documented and quite difficult to use in respect with
> subversion.
I find that not to be the case. There is a very nice tutorial
that walks one through setting up archives in arch; and I find arch
far easier to use than CVS; but I am not sure how that would compare
to subversion.
manoj
--
There are two problems with a major hangover. You feel like you are
going to die and you're afraid that you won't.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
