search for: darcswiki

...mes, and better branch > facilities). If people would like to see the logical `patch set' that made up a CVS commit then cvsps may be useful, or, as others have said, use Tailor to convert to a local repos. in your preferred format. http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/ http://www.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor > 4. I maintain that a real distributed VCS would be very useful for > LLVM, perhaps moreso than the other features provided by new VCS's. > Last time this came up, the available distributed vcs's all had > serious issues. Perhaps mercurial is 'there now'. I do...

...t; A deficiency in the cvs2svn script causes it to bloat the Subversion > repository (significantly, as in 10x) in the conversion of branches > and tags. It's probably a bit late in the day, but have you considered other CVS to SVN conversion tools, e.g. Tailor? http://www.darcs.net/DarcsWiki/Tailor http://darcs.arstecnica.it/tailor/ Cheers, Ralph.

On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Bill Wendling wrote: > Perhaps someone could come up with a list of different versioning > software, list the pros and cons, and then we could vote? (Has anyone > mentioned Bitkeeper yet? :-) There are a couple reasons we are using CVS still: 1. CVS works and is well understood by all involved. 2. The main deficiencies of CVS don't impact us much (we aren't

All, We are considering removing some branches and tags in the conversion process from CVS to SVN. We don't want to do this in a vaccuum, so please read carefully. A deficiency in the cvs2svn script causes it to bloat the Subversion repository (significantly, as in 10x) in the conversion of branches and tags. We can minimize the impact of this by only keeping branches and tags that we really