[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Why we might use subversion instead of arch.
From: |
Robert Anderson |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Why we might use subversion instead of arch. |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:10:58 -0500 |
--- Original Message ---
From: Tom Lord <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Why we might use subversion instead
of arch.
>
> > From: "Pierce T. Wetter III" <address@hidden>
>
> > So we're still in the "CVS sucks, but does it suck
enough to be worth
> > switching" state.
>
> > Hence the "might use subversion" above. We might just
stick with CVS
> > until tla 1.4 :-)
>
>Don't switch, then. Stick to CVS. From my perspective: Subversion
>will increase your costs far more than it reduces them.
I'll repeat myself here:
I really wanted to like subversion. But after awhile, I couldn't
help but conclude that it was a slower, incomplete, oft-broken
CVS with multiple unstable dependencies.
Bob