Fri Dec 1 22:16:15 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] SCM migration
- Next message: [Slony1-general] SCM migration
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 23:52 +0000, Christopher Browne wrote: > Preface: This is NOT a change that would take place anywhere near > immediately; any SCM migration would take place later. Agreed. Move first. THen worry about features :) Joshua D. Drake > > Jan Wieck wrote: > > On 11/28/2006 3:43 PM, Christopher Browne wrote: > >> > >> Agreeable to me; I'd like to consider moving to some other SCM, > >> preferably something inherently distributed, like > >> {Git|Mercurial|Darcs|Monotone} (where that's probably in decreasing > >> order of preference). > > > > What existing problem would that solve and what possible new problems > > would that eventually introduce? > One thing that the distributed SCMs all "solve" is that each checkout is > a full-fledged repository. No need for special tools like cvsup or for > special backup tools; any repository could become the authority simply > by fiat. Outages of a "central" server become fairly much irrelevant; > there is no need for access to the "central" server to do diffs or other > analysis. > > An attendant obvious disadvantage is that a checkout is somewhat bigger. > > A few little stats... > > Repository Size Size of tarball > ------------------------------------------- > Darcs 17660k 4916k > Mercurial 13656k 4412k > CVS 18096k 1928k > Subversion 19572k 5208k > Git 18444k 9092k > > CVS Checkout (HEAD): about 11M > > <http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/scm.html> > ----------------------------------------------- > CVS <http://www.cvshome.org/> is extremely popular, and it does the job. In fact, when CVS was released, CVS was a major new innovation in software configuration management <http://www.dwheeler.com/innovation/innovation.html>. However, CVS is now showing its age through a number of awkward limitations: changes are tracked per-file instead of per-change, commits aren't atomic, renaming files and directories is awkward, and its branching limitations mean that you'd better faithfully tag things or there'll be trouble later. Some of the maintainers of the original CVS have declared that the CVS code has become too crusty to effectively maintain. These problems led the main CVS developers to start over and create Subversion. > ----------------------------------------------- > > Generally, the newer SCMs support atomic commits, better handling of renaming things, and more sophisticated branching. > > _______________________________________________ > Slony1-general mailing list > Slony1-general at gborg.postgresql.org > http://gborg.postgresql.org/mailman/listinfo/slony1-general > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
- Previous message: [Slony1-general] SCM migration
- Next message: [Slony1-general] SCM migration
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Slony1-general mailing list