Robert Haas wrote:
> git IS a stable archive of what the patches really were.
No. A developer can delete, move and rebase branches in his own
repository as he likes, and all of those operations "modify history". In
fact, a developer can completely destroy or take offline his published
repository. It's *not* an archive.
There's other reasons why I like git very much over cvs, but archiving
is not one of them.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
