Page 1 of 1

Cvs is cooooolll

Posted: Sat Dec 28, 2002 7:16 pm
by michaelh20
I just merged my code with 1.7 instead of 1.7g0.. and I see all the conflicts etc.. and it's cool how you can see the two versions etc...

When I have several modifications on my side, how I can create more than 1 patch? I mean right now I'll just have 1 patch if I diff against CVS, but that includes modifications from more than 1 theme...

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 6:17 pm
by scanline
If you think CVS is cool, try subversion :)

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2003 6:43 am
by badger
or perforce. atomic changes rock!

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 2:34 am
by michaelh20
I am a mere newbie at the cvs like stuff, although I am a decent programmer.. haven't gotten full force into open-source development yet...

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 4:22 am
by KnightMare
I am a mere newbie at the cvs like stuff, although I am a decent programmer..

Um, i can vouche for that....

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 5:27 am
by Dervish

Coding and CVS, or similar app to keep track of different developer's versions, go hand-in-hand these days. In the old days of coding (before I was a programmer), the Internet wasn't such a hot topic and CVS-like utilities didn't exist.

So, are your developer skills better because you starting coding way back in the days, or have you just been out of the "loop"? :) Don't take any offense, just curious. :D

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 8:53 am
by JeffM
umm concurent versioning systems have been around for a VERY long time since at least 86-87. Any dev project above an amateur/student level has to use something. It's almost required for any project that has more then 1 person working on it. This stuff predates the internet by a fair amount, often working on lan or even local drives. CVS the app came out in 86, and I know there was stuff before that. There are even shells for CVS to make it tolerable.

so you may want to check your facts before telling the newbs "how it is"

There are many things better then CVS, its just the one that linux installs.

The linux kernel is even moving off of CVS, to perforce or bitkeeper, I think. I would love to see sourceforge follow suit. tho there is probably too much legacy with CVS, be nice if they offerd the choice.

Subversion is indeed realy cool. All the power of CVS, in a way easyer to use package, and integration into a webserver makes it nice. Tho I like Versioning Systems that are integated into my IDE to provide things like Diffs between versions, and automated checkouts and visual merges when you have confilcts. But I will proably use SVN for BZFlag-X. and run a local MS SourceSafe database for my own merges and backups. That is unitll the SVN DevStudio project is complete.

Posted: Sun Jan 12, 2003 9:05 am
by purple_cow
The first versioning system that I know of was AT&T's SCCS, which came out in 1975

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 2:32 am
by scanline
Linux has moved to bitkeeper, from using no revision control system other than diff and patch.

I've used CVS, SVN, and BitKeeper. CVS is nice since it's easy to find hosting for it on sourceforge, but it has a lot of annoying nitpicks: It's easy to get a stale lock on the server that prevents you from using it until it's cleared, you can't move files, it's annoying to store binary files in. Subversion solves these problems and a lot more. It's interface is very similar to CVS and it's open source, so it's an ideal migration path from CVS.

BitKeeper has a lot of nice features above and beyond what SVN can do, but its license is a Very Bad Thing to most people that care about the future of open source. Bitkeeper is closed source, however they let you use it free of charge on open projects. However, if you develop a competing version control system, even if it's open source, you have to pay for subversion. If bitkeeper were to become as popular as CVS, for example, it would be difficult for anyone to develop an alternative system.

SVN has had all the features I've needed so far and it's Free as in speech, so it's what I'd recommend at this point.

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 2:55 am
by Fiberchunks
the only thing I don't like about subversion is it's dependency on apache 2.x. If it were also compat with the 1.3.x series it would indeed be a great solution. The reason I state this is because those of us who would like to use php based software will have to deal with apache 2.x / php 4.x's incompatibilities (for the moment -- tho I hear that apache and php are working closely together to get stuff playing nicely) -- so this opinion will only last until php and apache resolve issues. So I suppose it's not really a critique of subversion, per se.

As an aside, and going along the same lines as what you mentioned scanline -- I can't believe that linux uses bitkeeper for it's vcs (for all the reasons you outlined above.) Seems kind of contrary to the overall philosophy (if you can call it that), of linux. Oh well, I suppose.


Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 6:11 am
by purple_cow
IIRC, there was a large controversy over linux's move because of bitkeeper's licensing. However, Linus decided to use what he considered the best tool for the job.

Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 1:27 pm
by Fiberchunks
Which was certainly a decent thing to do (cause he's admittedly incredibly lazy). However, perhaps he should have advocated people working to make cvs a superior tool (which would be more in line with the OS though process I suppose).

Ah well,


Posted: Mon Jan 20, 2003 7:11 pm
by scanline
And this all comes back to the differences between GNU's goals and Linux's goals.

A lot of people think GNU goes overboard with the tree-hugging hippie free software philosophy. To some extent I agree with that, but I also agree with a lot of GNU's philosophy.

Linux is on the other end of the free software spectrum, using the GNU GPL but only really interested in the pratcical aspects. Normally I'd be just groovy with that too, but the fact that they used bitkeeper means it's gone to a much greater extent than I thought.

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2003 7:04 am
by badger
Patlabor221 wrote:But I will proably use SVN for BZFlag-X. and run a local MS SourceSafe database for my own merges and backups. That is unitll the SVN DevStudio project is complete.
i recommend avoiding sourcesafe. ymmv but i've seen firsthand its tendency to screw up its database. it even comes with a tool for fixing slightly a damaged database, which should serve as a warning. i'll again recommend perforce. it's free for single users (which is how it sounds like you want to use it) and has some integration with devstudio.