RE: CVS v. SVN

> I've read all the literature on the svn website, and the online book
> at red-bean, and thought I understood the differences between CVS (a
> locking reporsitory) and SVN (a merging repository). Then I got into
> a discussion with a guy at the office I just met and he tells me I
> have it all backwards. Then tells me that developers can walk on each

> other's code with CVS, but not SVN because SVN locks write access.
> This is 180 degrees off from my understanding. He maintained that SVN

> is way better than CVS, but I got the impression he didn't know what
> he was talking about, and I am still too green to stand my ground in
> such a debate.

Having read the book and worked with SVN for a couple of years now, I
can say that I'm pretty sure you're both wrong. You are incorrect that
CVS is a locking model. He is incorrect that SVN is a locking model. SVN
supports locking but doesn't require it.

Rick

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Feb 23 17:16:51 2006