Quoting Alan Finlay ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I am in a bashing mood today. You are target, sorry.
> Sometimes waiting an hour > or two and working on something else so the updates can be done > sequentially can save the bother of a merge. So, let me give you an example. One big file. Person A works in the top of it and person B works in the bottom of it. Bam! Also, if you have to restructure your work to work on something else, you might very well waste more than just 2 hours of work. This is for every locking problem. > Branches in CVS are too heavyweight to do this and > when using CVS I am tempted to use a private revision control system to > manage my own checkpoints when the CVS branch is being shared by the team. This is true criticism. Bias - I am using Darcs for most of my projects. I am also one of those academic heads who likes functional languages much more than C or Java. -- jlouis
