[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: outsider's perspective

From: Steve deRosier
Subject: Re: outsider's perspective
Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 14:07:18 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030313


I wasn't trying to indicate that tar was the perfect tool for this, or even that it was or might be the right tool. I was simply suggesting that trying multiple tools in sequence might accomplish what was desired. tar was simply an example suggestion of a place to start looking.

But, I would disagree that "CVS already does effectively what tar does..." No, tar creates a single binary file for archive purposes. CVS does not do this. Also, tar DOES handle directory information and can preserve owners, permissions and all other directory meta-info. CVS does not do this. tar DOES NOT handle versioning or history information. CVS does do this. I was suggesting that somehow combining the two tools it may be possible to create a system that did what he was looking for.

I've been lurking on the list for a very long time, and it seems to me that the one of the largest perceived deficiencies with CVS is it can not handle directory meta information (in other words, it can't version directories). "Perceived" because some people consider this a deficiency while others consider it the "right way". Now, I'm not willing to debate if CVS is right or wrong in this, but it must be conceded that CVS doesn't do this, and as such may not be right for everyone. I've never needed the functionality, so I don't have an opinion on it one way or another.

Regardless, it doesn't really matter. CVS doesn't do as the poster wants. There may be ways to handle it using CVS + some other standard Linux tools, or maybe the poster will just need to move on to another tool.

Also, if so many people NEED this functionality, why doesn't it get added to CVS? If people only THINK they need it, then why don't we tell them how to do what it is they are actually trying to accomplish while using CVS? Maybe this NEED is real, and maybe it's just marketing from commercial version control companies, but one way or another it gets asked for. Giving people on this list the usual "if it doesn't work for you, well #*&@ you, go somewhere else" rant seems counter-productive.

Perhaps if we all discuss it calmly and logically, we can find a way to give people what they want and remain "true" to the "CVS-way". Some of the stuff on this list lately is beginning to look like a religious war, instead of useful discussion.

- Steve

Greg A. Woods wrote:
[ On Tuesday, May 27, 2003 at 11:39:22 (-0700), Steve deRosier wrote: ]

Subject: Re: outsider's perspective

As you know, CVS doesn't version directories and frankly was never designed with that in mind (never mind the argument over if it should or should not, it simply doesn't). But...there is a program that does record directory structure: tar. Perhaps you could somehow use tar in conjunction w/ CVS to do what you want to do.

CVS already does effectively what tar does, and it already does it with
support for recording the addition and deletion of files temporally,
something which tar obviously cannot do.

reply via email to

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