On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 06:59 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 21:46 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 21:07 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 06:33:17PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> >
> > > Right but we're talking at cross-purposes. What I mean is, are we
using
> > > these now with the fedora-extras and fedora-core dist-cvs? If so, what
> > > are the commands you're running to do that?
> > >
> > > Although we talk about branches with dist-cvs, there's no cvs
branches
> > > in the repository that I'm aware of. So I'm wondering if Karel
has some
> > > commands that he's using now or if this is a "If we use real
branches in
> > > the next SCM, it'll give us the ability to do operation Xyz in a
better
> > > way."
> >
> > Well, there's nothing to really prevent someone from using a branch for
> > private development. The buildsys won't build off of it, but you can
> > commit stuff to a branch if you'd like. And of course, there's also
the
> > tagging we _do_ use. Which is similar to a CVS branch. You can actually
> > do the merge command using tag names too.
> >
> > I can see some use cases for using branching with git, simply because
> > branches are trivial to create and work with.
> >
> Yeah -- branches in subversion and bazaar are trivial,
How comes you consider branches in CVS to be more complex?
I for one (Many year's of CVS power-usage), have never found subversion
branches easy to use (I've never used bazaar nor git).
cvs doesn't separate the concept of tags and branches. It also works on
individual files rather than whole trees. It could just be a limitation
of my brain but those two things made branches a lot harder for me to
understand in cvs.
-Toshio