[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Ongoing Comparison Between Version Control Systems

From: Andrew Suffield
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Ongoing Comparison Between Version Control Systems
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 16:39:37 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Sun, Sep 07, 2003 at 05:53:26PM +0300, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> I started composing a comparison between several prominent and accessible
> version control systems on a feature-by-feature basis. The comparison can
> be found here:
> The original XML and perl script that renders it, can be found here:
> I am contacting you to make sure Arch is properly represented there. Note
> that there were some things I did not there, and possibly some
> incorrections.

"File and Directories Copies"

Arch doesn't do this because it's considered a bad idea. Trying to
merge across a one-to-many copy of this form would be insanely

"Repository Permissions"

Arch can have exactly the same permissions system as subversion,
because it is also capable of using webdav. Alternatively, you can use
unix permissions and local files/sftp, or an ftpd and whatever that is
capable of.

However, you generally _don't_, because you use multiple archives with
branches between them instead (so each archive has approximately one
person writing to it). This is a convention rather than a limitation.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' : |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: pgpKfmxx7KWbE.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]