[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
CVS peculiarities blocking conversion from MKS RCS
From: |
J F |
Subject: |
CVS peculiarities blocking conversion from MKS RCS |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Dec 2004 14:07:38 -0500 |
Hello all,
I am new to CVS, but have been involved in version control systems for over a
decade.
My company has been using MKS RCS for nine years. It has served us well, but
due to shortcomings we need to upgrade to a newer version (too much $$$), or
switch to a different version control system.
To make the switch smooth, it is preferable to place all our existing archives
into the new system with all of the existing revision numbers intact. Yes of
course we use tags for releases, so keeping revision numbers shouldn't matter,
but for historical reasons we also have records that contain revision numbers.
If this kind of switch is not possible, we could maintain the existing system
for legacy and just start fresh with a new system, but in that case I'd
probably be looking closer at other systems such as Subversion.
I am attempting a conversion to CVSNT with that first idea -- keeping all the
existing revision numbers intact -- and am blocked.
CVS has bizarre rules for branch numbers. Odd numbered branches are for
'vendors', all branches must have tags, different commands are used to create
or commit onto branches, etc. What a mess. Our existing MKS RCS system has no
such rules or restrictions, as branches are treated in the exact same way as
the main trunk.
The more I look into CVS, the more odd and confusing it gets... I am getting
turned off... Here's your chance to change that, to convert me! :-)
Is there any way to have complete control over branch revision numbers in CVS?
Perhaps a write-up somewhere that describes how to work around the CVS
restrictions?
Any help is appreciated. Thank you!
--jsf
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- CVS peculiarities blocking conversion from MKS RCS,
J F <=