Steve Youngs <steve@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
[snip]
> And don't forget Hynek (who I think brought it up first). And yes, I
> too have been thinking about it because of what has been said by others.
hehe, ah, yepp, the hynek guy, who once convinced me to stick to arch and
now left the arch side because of too many features ;)
(I really like to hear the comment from him, at least he can't /kick me
here ;))
> > I'm _not_ against CVS, but i really think we should consider
> > tracking at least with one other tool: gnu arch.
>
> Because of the difficulties that I foresee in keeping multiple vc
> tracking systems in sync, I'd rather we choose one and stick with it.
No, there aren't such difficulties. In contrast to other vc systems arch
provides some neat util called tla-cvs-sync for it ... just committing to
cvs and running the sync works fine. I use it for a lot of projects, where
cvs has - hm, say - release snapshots and arch keeps really finely tracked
changesets.
[snip]
> So, would it work in a similar fashion to the way Linus runs the Linux
> kernel? I'd maintain the main "central" repository, and other
> developers would have their own separate ones. When it comes time for
> me to roll out a release I "pull" in patches from the "subsidiary
> repositories".
YEPP! EXACTLY like this. Lemme put this on the arch wiki ;)
[snip]
> You are obviously quite familiar with this "arch" thingy. Can you
> explain to me the various pros and cons in comparison with CVS?
Pros:
- keeping track of changesets (i.e. some sort of a snapshot of the whole
repo) instead of keeping track of single files which a priori have no
relation between each other
- better branching and merging: It's possible to merge anything with
anything. CVS is capable of this when firing a lot of human resources
- easier access: Anything that allows you to d/l files is a suitable arch
access point (preferably it's used with http), the commit side is easily
done without adding servers/daemons or users, just commit to your local
repo and once every while the deity of choice wanders around to gather
the local repo changesets and commits them to his/her master repo ;)
(I really wonder why I wrote her)
Cons:
- It's not widely spread and the feature list is some miles long
- It's too complex/complicated for newbies
- It requires some discipline to have a clean repo
Okay, further, more detailed stuff can be found here
http://wiki.gnuarch.org/moin.cgi/SubVersionAndCvsComparison
For CVS interoperation:
http://wiki.gnuarch.org/moin.cgi/Interoperating_20with_20CVS
And for deserters:
http://wiki.gnuarch.org/moin.cgi/Learning_20Arch_20commands_20for_20CVS_20users
hroptatyr
|