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.
Hi, I'm considering using CVSNT instead of the "standard" linux distribution of CVS (1.11.3). The server will still run on linux, and we will have a mix of *ix command line, WinCVS, and Tortoise clients (>150 users). I've done some testing and generally like what I've found, but need to have pretty strong justification to support the cost of upgrading. So far I've been able to come up with the list below but I expect I've missed some (or misunderstood some). Please add, or comment on any of these or point me to some other information (I couldn't find any useful faq...). 1. Provides better support for current windows clients (yes, I know that's vague, but I don't believe it makes sense to run WinCVS 1.3 against a 1.11.3 server...) 2. Pseudo exclusive lock capability that doesn't require admin command access (suitable for editing binary files for example) (cvs edit -c) 3. Solves Daylight Savings Time problem (or is it that WinCVS 1.3 solves it...?) 4. Provides better security capabilities a. ACLs per directory b. Sserver protocol (I believe is simply pserver over ssl) c. Password management 5. Simple repository browse capability (cvs ls) 6. Atomic commit support (but I don't believe this implies serialization with checkout & update which I believe is the real issue. This is also not on by default and I get the impression it isn't universally endorsed.) 7. Separate locking process (I'm not positive of the benefit.) 8. Actively under development. Thanks, - Rick