CVS is dead

Martin Marques martin at marquesminen.com.ar
Thu Dec 27 14:50:18 UTC 2007


Robert P. J. Day escribió:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2007, Martin Marques wrote:
> 
>> Robert P. J. Day escribió:
>>> and if one were to start a new project that didn't have to be strictly
>>> backward compatible with anything, and one already had a decent
>>> grounding in CVS, subversion would also be a reasonable choice.
>> Why?
> 
> because subversion corrects a number of CVS "issues", and the command
> structure is very similar to that of CVS, so all that CVS knowledge
> can be transferred over fairly quickly.

I will talk about Mercurial, that is what I use.

Mercurial fixes all the CVS *issues* and also has the same command
structure:

hg status
hg commit -m "some comment"
hg add
hg diff
etc.

And you can start to enter the wonderful world of distributed VCS. :-D

> i didn't say that subversion was the best version control system of
> all the possible choices -- only that, if one was already fairly
> conversant with CVS, it would be a "reasonable" choice for a new
> project.

All the new VCS have tried to keep the same command structure, not only svn





More information about the fedora-list mailing list