On Tuesday 19 February 2008, Shahar Dag wrote: > Hi > > the advantage of SVN over CVS is: > 1. if you commit several files, in SVN it is an atomic action while in CVS > it is not. Than mean that with CVS some file may be updated while other > wont ==> your repository is not consistent
From what I know even the commit of one file in CVS is not atomic. Thus, a single file may be "partially" commited if something bad happens. In some other version control systems, such as ClearCase, each file is commited atomically, while the transcation itself is not atomic. In Subversion, however, and in most other modern open-source version control systems, the entire commit transaction is atomic. > 2. when renaming, CVS will loose the history while SVN whill handle it OK > Yes. Note, however, that at the moment svn will not merge diffs against files that were renamed afterwards. Aside from these, svn has many other advantages over CVS. See the "Subversion's Features" list in http://subversion.tigris.org/ . Regards, Shlomi Fish --------------------------------------------------------------------- Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/ I'm not an actor - I just play one on T.V. ================================================================To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
