Re: [Xorg] Reorganizing the xc/include directory

On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 13:23, Jon Smirl wrote:
> If you used bitkeeper you could do the branch with history without doing any
> special commands. You could sync it to the trunk every day automatically unless
> there is a merge conflict. It would track file renames in the history and do
> merges that track the file renames. Plus bkbits provides a transparent bridge to
> CVS for people that stick with it.
> 
> Just my occasional plug for bitkeeper. After using it on the kernel I have
> concluded that it is way better than CVS. Just my opinion, I have nothing to do
> with the company.

And, at the risk of becoming *completely* off topic, if using BitKeeper
is undesirable due to license issues, both Subversion of Arch offer much
better feature sets than CVS, including the ability to move/rename files
with history.  Subversion is probably the choice to go with if you want
to make CVS-regulars feel comfortable; interface is very similar.  Arch
(my personal favorite) and BitKeeper take completely different methods
of operation than CVS/Subversion.  Subversion also has several CVS
import/export tools to assist with gradual migration.
-- 
Sean Middleditch <[email protected]>
AwesomePlay Productions, Inc.