Re: Some design questions (once more)

On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 02:20:35AM +0200, Josef Wolf wrote:

> OK, but if you want an exact copy of CVS then you have to expalin why
> the subversion project exists. AFAIK subversion tries to make some
> things better than cvs. AFAICS it actually does _much_ better. CVS
> could not do better, because it relies on the file-based RCS. But SVN
> _could_ do better because svn is no more file-based but module-based.
> But for some reason you don't _want_ it to do better. Ummm...

the stated goal of the subversion project is to build a revision
control system that follows as closely as possible the style that CVS
provides, while correcting as many of the more grevious problems with
CVS. in the future, we may explore some functionality that isn't
present in CVS, but overall, the general development style that CVS
provides for has proven to be quite usefull, and we feel that sticking
to it is a good thing.

and honestly, the statement that we are 'module based' rather than
'file based' is pretty much completely false. SVN has no concept of
modules at this time at all, although it may in the future. it does
version things other than files (directories specifically, and
eventually symlinks), but that's not the same as being module based.
actually, to be entirely accurate, SVN versions tree structures
(directories and the files they contain).

-garrett

-- 
garrett rooney                    Remember, any design flaw you're 
rooneg@electricjellyfish.net      sufficiently snide about becomes  
http://electricjellyfish.net/     a feature.       -- Dan Sugalski
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org