This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: workflow idiom to compare zip/tgz with folder subtree
- From: Warren Young <wyml at etr-usa dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 09:19:21 -0600
- Subject: Re: workflow idiom to compare zip/tgz with folder subtree
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <loom dot 20150922T134912-790 at post dot gmane dot org> <97783140 dot 20150922161211 at yandex dot ru> <loom dot 20150923T030425-106 at post dot gmane dot org> <6E467703-38A3-4128-ACEE-26D0F75678D0 at etr-usa dot com> <loom dot 20150925T025036-592 at post dot gmane dot org> <308131881 dot 20150925043958 at yandex dot ru>
On Sep 24, 2015, at 7:39 PM, Andrey Repin <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> I noticed that fossil & cvs are part of cygwin. I will have to bite
>> the bullet & try a few baby steps at some point.
> I would NOT recommend CVS to anyone making their first steps into
> VCS world.
No new repos should be created in CVS, for any reason.
The only reason the tool is still being maintained is to serve old repos that have not converted for one reason or another.
> Subversion is way more consistent, better thought out and have about the same
> usability characteristics where they are comparable.
There is no case where CVS has any material advantage over Subversion, with the exception of installation and build simplicity, and thatâs irrelevant in 2015 when every OS (or OS-like, in the case of Cygwin) distro has easy ways to get pre-packaged Subversion.
And if build and distribution simplicity matters, Fossil beats even CVS:
$ cygcheck -l fossil | wc -l
$ cygcheck -l cvs | wc -l
While writing this message, I tried looking up the CVS home page, whose name I forgot since leaving it for Subversion a dozen years ago. It wasnât even on the first page of Google results, even though Google knows full well Iâm a software developer, based on past search history.
And lest you think it was a problem of insufficient Google juice to the old CVS home page, the Wikipedia page for CVS-the-VCS (as opposed to CVS-the-pharmacy) wasnât on the first page of results, either.
That should tell you something.
Then when you finally arrive at the page, the link to the documentation is a broken link into the Wayback Machine, because all the sites that used to host the docs have disappeared due to lack of interest.
(And yes, Iâm aware that Fossil isnât on the first page of Google results, either, being pushed off by Fossil the fashion wear company. But then, Fossil today doesnât have the popularity that CVS once had, so thereâs no reason to expect it to be there yet, with such a generic name.)
> The unly reason I was using CVS up until a month ago for some of my projects
> is because I was lazy and did not convert them to Subversion ten years ago.
I donât know about âlazyâ. Some conversions are just plain difficult. Cygwin is one, as are are FreeBSD and several others I could dig up who converted many years past the peak popularity of Subversion.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple