From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFEAEBB81 for ; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:49:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.syd.swiftdsl.com.au (smtp.syd.swiftdsl.com.au [218.214.224.138]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.13.0/8.13.0) with SMTP id iBI9nHiA002976 for ; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:49:38 +0100 Received: (qmail 24268 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2004 09:49:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO coltrane.mega-nerd.net) (218.214.64.136) by smtp.syd.swiftdsl.com.au with SMTP; 18 Dec 2004 09:49:32 -0000 Received: from coltrane (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by coltrane.mega-nerd.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 805C47AD7 for ; Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:49:15 +1100 (EST) Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:49:15 +1100 From: Erik de Castro Lopo To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] [OT] Rant about VCS Message-Id: <20041218204915.111c63b2.ocaml-erikd@mega-nerd.com> In-Reply-To: <20041218092855.GA30614@pegasos> References: <41C3126A.3060101@barettadeit.com> <20041217213753.GA2295@pegasos> <20041218092716.18ca0ed7.ocaml-erikd@mega-nerd.com> <20041218092855.GA30614@pegasos> Organization: Erik Conspiracy Secret Labs X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.0beta3 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 41C3FD1D.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 sven:01 luther:01 sven:01 luther:01 wrote:01 cvs:01 cvs:01 nospam:98 dec:03 erik:04 erik:04 arch:05 arch:05 probably:05 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 10:28:56 +0100 Sven Luther wrote: > Well, arch and subversion are different kind of system. subversion is a good > cvs replacement, while arch aims more at the bitkeeper category. Yes, subversion aims to be a better CVS while Arch and Bitkeeper aim to be a better revision control system. If you want a better revision control system CVS is probably not a good place to start. > That said, there is no real support for tagging in > arch, which is what makes subversion preferable for the debian-like usage, > where we tag each released version. There is an arch way to do this: tla tag project--devel project--release--versionnumber Its even called tag. What more could you want :-). Erik -- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ Erik de Castro Lopo nospam@mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid) +-----------------------------------------------------------+ "There is no satisfactory substitute for excellence." -- Dr. Arnold O. Beckman