Thread: Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: [HACKERS] linked list rewrite)

From
David Garamond
Date:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> (btw, if you want to work offline, which i saw referred to a couple of
> times, wouldn't cvsup do most of the job?).

 From what I understand, a "distributed" source control means each
developer gets his own _repository_, not just a working copy. This means
you can commit to your own repo and even accept patches (either from the
master repo, other developer's repo, or from a 3rd party). In Linux
analogy, each developer can become an Alan Cox and maintain his own -ac
line.

 From what I understand, CVSup is a tool to mirror the repository. It
doesn't allow each copy of the repository gets independently developed,
and then transferring around the modifications, or does it?

--
dave