From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10612 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2009 01:27:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 10605 invoked by uid 22791); 5 Jun 2009 01:27:43 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from pool-98-110-183-121.bstnma.fios.verizon.net (HELO cgf.cx) (98.110.183.121) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 05 Jun 2009 01:27:38 +0000 Received: from ednor.cgf.cx (ednor.casa.cgf.cx [192.168.187.5]) by cgf.cx (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F4313C0C3 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 21:27:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by ednor.cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201) id 86981625510; Thu, 4 Jun 2009 21:27:26 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 01:27:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Subject: Re: cvs vs. svn vs. git vs.... (was: Cygwin 1.7 release) Message-ID: <20090605012726.GA1795@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Reply-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com References: <1244061552.9556.1318646127@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20090604091627.GS23519@calimero.vinschen.de> <2bf229d30906040403o17d43ef5q5ccfdbb5f54977ae@mail.gmail.com> <4A27B4DB.7030801@gmail.com> <2bf229d30906041045x2832e7b5xc22a8f344ee8ba92@mail.gmail.com> <20090604175811.GB753@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090604182311.GZ23519@calimero.vinschen.de> <20090604184827.GD753@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20090604194009.GB23519@calimero.vinschen.de> <4A283549.80208@etr-usa.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A283549.80208@etr-usa.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2009-q2/txt/msg00032.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 02:57:45PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: >Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >> I still don't understand why everybody is moving away from CVS. > >0. Far cleaner versioning scheme: just rXXXX, instead of CVS's >x.y.z.q.omega.hairball mess. I guess this might annoy those who keep >their repository versions in step with their public version numbering >scheme, but I always found it a pain to renumber my CVS repo when there >was a new major release. And keeping minor releases in step? >Fuggeddaboudit. I think it was basically a rhetorical question. Most of the benefits that people wave pom poms about for other SCMs don't really apply to Cygwin. >Asked about his backup strategy years ago, Linus said he didn't make >backups, because all the stuff he cared about was replicated on FTP, >news, and mail servers all over the world. As far as software goes, >that ignores the pain of losing the play-by-play checkin history. I think that's a pretty compelling reason to use git actually. When sourceware went down a couple of days ago, I was dreading the thought that it could have been disk corruption. With a distributed SCM most of the damage would have been ameliorated. cgf