Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: subversion vs cvs

From: Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>,PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: subversion vs cvs
Date: 2004-03-24 04:26:10
Message-ID: mjqzna698gt.fsf@cs.berkeley.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
>>>>> "Marc" == Marc G Fournier <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:

    Marc> On Tue, 23 Mar 2004, Sailesh Krishnamurthy wrote:
    >> Which brings me to another question .. has anybody considered
    >> using subversion instead of CVS ?

    Marc> Why?  not that I'm for a chance from something that isn't
    Marc> broken, but what advantages does subversion give us over
    Marc> what we already have?

I've had plenty of pain with cvs in terms of directories not being
first-class etc .. but I don't really contribute to pgsql so you guys
probably don't have the same experience. 

I was just curious as it looks like eventually subversion (or arch :-)
will be an alternative to cvs. 

-- 
Pip-pip
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh



In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2004-03-24 05:37:49
Subject: Re: linked list rewrite
Previous:From: Christopher Kings-LynneDate: 2004-03-24 04:12:19
Subject: Re: bug in 7.4 SET WITHOUT OIDs

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2004-03-24 04:29:33
Subject: Re: partial VACUUM FULL
Previous:From: glennDate: 2004-03-24 04:10:24
Subject: ole db

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group