Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
> The only showstopper for me in the past had been lack of distributed > (or at the very least, replicated) repositories, and even that was > on one project. My primary users of CVS are in Phoenix (me, where my server is), Houston, Toronto, and Bangalore. I would have liked to have a replicated repository in Bangalore at least, but with compression and low overhead it's still viable to use from there. There aren't a lot of users on my CVS server, but they are very widespread. IMHO CVS's biggest shortcoming is the branching / merging support. Maybe it's just my lack of experience with it, but the required precision with which you have to execute branching and merging seems excessive. Branch here, but make sure you tag it. Now merge into trunk, but make sure you either stop using that branch or tag again because now you can end up merging the same changes twice if you aren't careful. I likely just need some practice with it to feel more comfortable, but IMHO it could be done a lot better. Combine that with having to rewrite every RCS file on a TAG operation and it compounds the time to perform these type operations--and I can see the advantage to moving to a database backend. If that database backend also tracked the branch merging and allowed for "easier" branch management, I would certainly by happy. > What will, eventually, be widespread (I think) is one of the newer > version control systems - Monotone, darcs, Arch - which provide I'll have to go look at those other project you mentioned, it sounds interesting. Glen Starrett