[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: How well does CVS handle other types of data?

From: Thornley, David
Subject: RE: How well does CVS handle other types of data?
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 15:44:57 -0500

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
> John Dixon writes:
> > 
> > Does anyone have experience using CVS with CAD/CAM binary 
> data files like 
> > .MOD (Solution3000) or .DWG (Mechanical Desktop)?
> Since such file don't allow for concurrent modifications, I can't
> imagine why you'd want to use the *Concurrent* Versions 
> System to store
> them.
Here at work, we have binary files scattered through the text files.
Since CVS is one of the better available systems for source code,
and using two systems is a significant cost, and CVS handles binary
files in an adequate manner, that's what we do.

I have a repository at home, which serves one developer (me) and
therefore doesn't involve concurrent development.  I use it partly
because I'm familiar with it, but also because it works well over the
home network (Linux and Macs) and serves my needs very well.

I can have branches for possible development work.  I can tag
release points and cut branches, so I can fix bugs without
interfering with new features.  I can easily create diffs between
versions.  If I screw up maintaining the change log, it's easy
to recover from.  It's overkill, but what that means is that it
satisfies all my current needs and I have room to go from there.

There's also the fact that I'm doing my home stuff on as low a
budget as I can get away with, and CVS fits into that budget
very nicely.

It seems to me that, to forego the possibility of concurrent
development (which is irrelevant to me) I'd have to forego
things that I care about.   Can I get a Linux/Mac source code
system that does branching for free other than CVS?

> -Larry Jones
> Some people just don't have inquisitive minds. -- Calvin
Sometimes these random .sigs seem appropriate.  :-)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]