Re: FreeBSD 6.0 and onwards
From: Craig Rodrigues (rodrigc_at_crodrigues.org)
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 22:41:14 -0500 To: firstname.lastname@example.org
On Sat, Nov 06, 2004 at 04:55:10PM +0100, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> > some time ago there was a report on "using svn in fbsd developement" on
> > hackers@ iirc, any news in opinions on using RCS in fbsd?
> I'll guess that they are quite satisfied using Perforce. This is a
> very good and supported version control system, and IMO Subversion is
> not yet up to par with it. Arch is quite nice, but a completely
> different approach, seemingly better suited to de-central development
> such as with Linux.
Well, if everyone is throwing around ideas for their favorite
RCS, then how about Bitkeeper? It is quite popular
in Linux kernel development circles, and was designed
with distributed development in mind. I've seen it used
successfully for sub-projects in the Linux kernel (i.e. LK-SCTP) which
was then merged into the main Linux kernel.
This seems similar to how Perforce is used by FreeBSD developers.
On their website, Bitkeeper has comparisons to other systems
(RCS, CVS, Perforce, ClearCase):
While it might not change anyone's mind, it is interesting
to be aware of, especially since it is popular in Linux circles.
Hey, if Perforce works fine, then why change it? :)
-- Craig Rodrigues http://crodrigues.org email@example.com _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "email@example.com"