On 17.01.19 18:35, David Christensen wrote: > On 1/16/19 2:15 PM, Andy Smith wrote: > > I second the suggestion to learn version control... > > +1 > > I started with RCS. The concepts and commands are straight-forward, but the > granularity is per-file. It works great for managing key /etc/* files on > remote servers. But, RCS gets tedious when you want to manage many files. > > I soon discovered CVS, which operates on directories (projects). I put the > CVS repository on my file server and can access any project from any machine > over SSH with the CVS client. This arrangement has proven to be incredibly > useful. (Every night, the file server is backed up and the CVS repository > is also archived.) > > The canonical CVS book is "Open Source Development with CVS", which has been > released under GPL3: > > http://cvsbook.red-bean.com/ > > David
Seconded. After a couple of decades using CVS, I'm not likely to shift to the newfangled offerings either. The manual which served us well in the old days was "The Cederquist": https://ftp.gnu.org/non-gnu/cvs/source/feature/1.12.13/cederqvist-1.12.13.pdf The thing with RCS's per-file focus is that two different versions of the application may use the same version of some of the sourcefiles, but will have different versions of others. CVS's "tag" command facilitates identifying that set of file versions, with a meaningful name. Being able to also apply a check-in comment is also nifty. When managing software projects across three countries, I found its automatic merge ability to be an incredible productivity boost. It will, though, take some getting used to, as will any VCS. Erik
