Difference between revisions of "VersionControlSystem"
(→git) |
(→BZR) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
**A decentralised repository would mean that people don't have to be logged in to change the code, although they would not then benefit from the public_html facility. |
**A decentralised repository would mean that people don't have to be logged in to change the code, although they would not then benefit from the public_html facility. |
||
| − | == |
+ | == bzr == |
Bazzar-ng will be released with etch and is a candidate that fixes all the above shortcommings |
Bazzar-ng will be released with etch and is a candidate that fixes all the above shortcommings |
||
| + | *Has native windows support |
||
== git == |
== git == |
||
Revision as of 13:58, 23 October 2006
Options for the replacement of CVS
- CVS has a limited authentication model that means we need to fudge permissions every time a file is updated.
- Symlinks are not supported
- CVS is centralised which means that people need to be logged into the cvs pserver in order to use it
- A decentralised repository would reduce the need for branching when commiting medium sized changesets.
- A decentralised repository would mean that people don't have to be logged in to change the code, although they would not then benefit from the public_html facility.
bzr
Bazzar-ng will be released with etch and is a candidate that fixes all the above shortcommings
- Has native windows support
git
Git will be released with etch and is a candidate that fixes all the above shortcommings
- Renames are guessed based on the contents of a file as opposed to svn & bzr which use unique-ids
svn
SVN is the usual drop-in replacement for CVS.
- SVN fixes most of the CVS shortcommings
- SVN is very similar in operation to CVS
- SVN uses a centralised repository
