RE: Re: Alternatives for remote access?

> I don't think Subversion will completely ever be a superset of CVS's
> entire use case out of the box. I think that's very unrealistic. CVS has
> several very broken ideas about how it should do certain things. Group,
> and other permission setting as the classic recent example of a hotly
> debated issue.
>
> 95% intersection with CVS use cases, perhaps, but I don't think we'd
> ever want to do a 100% use case intersection with CVS. It's not worth
> the extra grief, code management issues, and just plain bad design.
>
> In fact, thinking that Subversion is supposed to be a complete superset
> of CVS seems to be a very common misconception. :(

Gee, I wonder how people come away with that "misconception"...

Lets look at the subversion homepage:

 "Subversion is trying to be a better CVS, so it will have all CVS
  features eventually, with most of them in the 1.0 release."

Note that it doesn't say "most", or "the good features", or "95%".
It says "all" features.

Until the homepage and other documents spread around the site are fixed
then it ain't a misconception, its a stated goal.

Michael

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Aug 30 23:05:16 2002