RE: giving up CVS

[Thornley, David]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden
> 
> Using CVS to try to track changes to non-text files is a 
> losing proposition,
> almost by definition.
> 
Almost by definition, you lose the main reason for considering CVS.
This does not necessarily make it a losing proposition.

> CVS is quite literally less useful for tracking changes to non-text
> files than RCS alone can ever be.
> 
Really?

Does RCS enable merging changes to non-text files?

Since it doesn't, what does it do better?

There are a lot of things CVS does better than RCS.  CVS manages
concurrent development, branches, and works well by directory or
module rather than by file.  By using non-text files, the concurrent
part goes out the window, and branches become less useful.  The
rest of the advantages remain.