[Ecls-list] CVS is working. Please confirm.
ehuels at gmail.com
Thu May 22 10:06:00 UTC 2008
On 5/21/08, Samium Gromoff <_deepfire at feelingofgreen.ru> wrote:
> From: "Erik Huelsmann" <ehuels at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ecls-list] CVS is working. Please confirm.
> Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 16:05:56 +0200
> > On the other hand, if you don't want to exclude the Windows people and
> > still want to have a central repository anyway, Subversion also
> > eliminates the need for "repository replication" as CVS does. This
> > means that the public read-only and public developer repositories are
> > actually the same, giving new changes instantly to the non-committers
> > crowd.
> > As an additional advantage, there are very good Windows tools
> > available to check out Subversion repositories (Check out TortoiseSVN
> > if you didn't already!).
> It's amazing how Subversion people _still_ keep promoting a clearly
> inferior VCS.
> Sorry for the OT, but this is getting annoying.
Why? Does git have the level of integration with Windows as TortoiseSVN?
Also, what's "clearly" to you may be less obvious by others, or even
untrue for others, since they might have other criteria to judge by.
You didn't ever hear me say Subversion is the best VC. I just said
that - if you want a centralised system - Subversion is a choice which
integrates well with Windows.
Btw, neither do I say git isn't a good VC, so I'm not really getting
where the name-calling came from.
More information about the ecl-devel