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

[Greg A. Woods]

[ On Friday, July 13, 2001 at 11:47:27 (-0700), Mike Castle wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: How well does CVS handle other types of data?
>
> And it is one that cvs supports VERY well.  Why should I have to have two
> solutions for the same problem of working remotely?  cvs and scp or rsync
> would work together well.  But, the difficulty of creating that system is
> more likely more hassle than dealing with the limitations of cvs.

Because CVS is not the appropriate tool for some purposes.  It doesn't
matter if it can get up and sing and dance -- it's still a hammer when
you're looking for a TORX screwdriver!

> Obviously you have to have some sort of mapping in side cvs (in a text
> file) that points to the correct versions of the binary file.
> 
> for instance, say we have a listing such as:
> 
> manual=manual-2001-03-07.doc
> 
> In one branch is gets changed to
> manual=manual-2001-03-09.doc
> 
> And in another branch it gets changed to:
> manual=manual-2001-05-13.doc
> 
> That is still a merge problem.  CVS marks it as a conflict.

Exactly.  CVS marks the conflict.  You know exactly what your options
are at this point.

> presenting two versions of the files in question to the user.

Currently CVS does not present to versions of the file to the user.

Maybe the "nomerge" state option I described could help here in that at
least CVS could still mark the conflict, but that's still just blue sky
dreaming....

-- 
                                                        Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <address@hidden>     <address@hidden>
Planix, Inc. <address@hidden>;   Secrets of the Weird <address@hidden>