From: Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>
To: Val Henson <val@nmt.edu>
Cc: Erik Andersen <andersen@codepoet.org>,
"Jonathan A. George" <JGeorge@greshamstorage.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel SCM: When does CVS fall down where it REALLY matters?
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 03:25:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020309032500.A18544@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C87FD12.8060800@greshamstorage.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44L.0203072057510.2181-100000@imladris.surriel.com> <20020308003827.GA8348@codepoet.org> <20020308185238.B25086@boardwalk>
In-Reply-To: <20020308185238.B25086@boardwalk>; from val@nmt.edu on Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:52:38PM -0700
On Fri, Mar 08, 2002 at 06:52:38PM -0700, Val Henson wrote:
> I strongly recommend that anyone attempting to make CVS a viable
> replacement for BitKeeper start out by actually using BitKeeper.
> You're so used to being crippled by CVS that you don't even know what
> you're missing.
Agreed. And I suggest anyone doing such a study investigate all
the different parts of bitkeeper, not just its file-management /
distributed repository features.
Little things make a lot of difference. Things like per-file
comments on checkins instead of a single per-checking comment.
And ease of use for some really mundane merge-tasks (See my earlier
mail in this thread for details)
It's only through actual usage patterns that you'll see all the
neat time-saving gizmo's in there.
--
| Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
| SuSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-09 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-07 23:51 Kernel SCM: When does CVS fall down where it REALLY matters? Jonathan A. George
2002-03-07 23:59 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-08 0:03 ` Cort Dougan
2002-03-09 11:17 ` Roman Zippel
2002-03-09 16:45 ` Kurt Roeckx
2002-03-08 0:26 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-08 0:36 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-08 1:48 ` Neil Brown
2002-03-10 20:27 ` Pavel Machek
2002-03-11 21:11 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-12 16:31 ` Pavel Machek
2002-03-08 7:37 ` Alex Riesen
2002-03-08 0:29 ` Jonathan A. George
2002-03-08 0:43 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-08 9:32 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-03-08 16:37 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-08 20:15 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-03-08 20:22 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-08 20:28 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-03-08 0:38 ` Erik Andersen
2002-03-08 9:38 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-03-09 1:52 ` Val Henson
2002-03-09 2:00 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-03-09 2:25 ` Dave Jones [this message]
2002-03-08 1:19 ` Dave Jones
2002-03-08 20:27 ` Jonathan A. George
2002-03-08 21:59 ` Eli
2002-03-08 3:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-03-08 9:39 ` Pau Aliagas
2002-03-11 17:05 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-11 17:12 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-03-11 17:25 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-11 17:53 ` Jonathan A. George
2002-03-11 18:03 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-11 20:36 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-11 21:01 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-11 21:28 ` Rik van Riel
2002-03-10 19:28 ` Pavel Machek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-09 22:22 Tom Lord
2002-03-11 17:10 ` Larry McVoy
2002-03-12 6:09 ` Tom Lord
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020309032500.A18544@suse.de \
--to=davej@suse.de \
--cc=JGeorge@greshamstorage.com \
--cc=andersen@codepoet.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=val@nmt.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox