>>>>> "David" == David Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David> On Thu, 2008-03-13 at 13:35 -0400, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>> If by "really weird" you mean "nobody has any real complaints
>> about the way it works and are happy it is close to what they were
>> using before", then yes, they are using something "really weird".
David> To be honest, I find it weird that Subversion even
David> exists. Precisely because it _is_ so close to what people were
David> using before, as you point out. I've never really understood
David> why anyone would bother to change from CVS to SVN -- it just
David> seems to be part of the 'one VCS per project' insanity.
I suspect you haven't looked at Subversion at all. It's vastly
superior to CVS. As the book puts it, Subversion has "look and feel
similar to CVS" while "attempting to fix most of CVS's noticeable
flaws".
To list just a few of the fixes: atomic checkouts and commits, instant
branching/tagging, support for file rename, ability to reliably obtain
any previous state of the source repository. Those are a few of the
very good reasons why GCC switched. The unfortunate thing is that
other FSF projects haven't yet switched -- it baffles me that this is
so.
At work we switched from CVS to Subversion around the same time GCC
did, and for the same sort of reasons. Having used both, I can tell
you now that I will NEVER willingly use CVS again. Never.
paul
