Re: git versus CVS (versus bk)

From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: 2005-10-31 21:24:11
Hi,

On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> It's really not very easy to explain why CVS sucks. After all, sometimes 
> people who have used it for decades have a hard time understanding the 
> suckiness.
>
> [...]

How about adding the whole explanation as

	git/Documentation/howto/tell-why-cvs-sucks.txt

(maybe with some more polite name)?

Also, Iīd like to add that CVS branching/merging is no good:

<tryingtoputonalbertsshoes>

Sometimes a developer gets an idea, or the need, to implement a certain 
feature to a piece of free software. Now, this idea might seem good, but 
it might take a while to

	- implement it,
	- flesh the bugs out, and
	- maybe realize the idea was not all that good.

All the while, the project is prospering, and you have to keep up-to-date. 
With CVS, you would do "cvs update" every once in a while, and clean up 
the merge conflicts. In effect, you would track the history of the 
upstream project.

Often, however, you would like to track *your* changes, too. This is not 
possible in CVS. You just canīt track two different histories in the same 
working directory.

Now, if you are working on two or more different ideas, which you want to 
test separately *and* together, you need to merge your local branches 
every once in a while. If it werenīt for "every once in a while", but 
"once", you still could do it in CVS. If you want to merge several times 
(keeping the separate development branches), you canīt.

</tryingtoputonalbertsshoesfailingmiserably>

Ciao,
Dscho

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Mon Oct 31 21:24:50 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-10-31 21:24:54 EST