> > Perforce, Bitkeeper and Subversion are all "better-breed-CVS" solutions, > > while I consider arch to be a "better-breed-revision-control-system". > > You may be right about Perforce or Subversion (though I doubt it), but > the arch blurb I found sounds very similar to Bitkeeper. It's not just similar. One of the reasons why Bitkeeper doesn't have its code available anymore is because they claimed that Arch was copying the internal mechanisms of Bitkeeper. I have seen both working and would definitely stick for Bitkeeper. OTOH, CVS is good enough, Bitkeeper is not free software, and that's not the place to discuss that <wink>. -- Gustavo Niemeyer [ 2AAC 7928 0FBF 0299 5EB5 60E2 2253 B29A 6664 3A0C ]
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4