[Chicago] Sprint, Imagescape

[Brian W. Fitzpatrick]

On 3/14/06, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote:
> Andrew Dudzik wrote:
> > On 3/14/06, *Atul Varma* <varmaa at gmail.com <mailto:varmaa at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     CVS just plain sucks compared to its competition
> >
> >
> >  Allow me to introduce you to a little program called VSS...
>
> I think the better statement would be that CVS compares to SVN, and
> mostly sucks compared to the new generation of distributed VC systems --
> but it's really easy to compare CVS to SVN, and not as easy to compare
> to the other systems (the distributed-vs-centralized debate is seperate
> from the quality-of-tool debate).

Hmm.  I'd give Subversion more credit than that.  Subversion is a CVS
replacement, but it's *light years* ahead of CVS in just about every
aspect.  I think CVS is pretty much dead and Subversion will continue
to happily swallow up CVS' market share.  See

http://subversion.tigris.org/svn-dav-securityspace-survey.html

> But notably every new generation of systems works from the CVS *model*
> as a basis.  SVN copies is very closely.  Distributed systems change it,
> but use CVS as their point of reference for changes.  And all those
> other proprietary systems are just dead ends.  (Except probably
> BitKeeper, which has been very influential)

The biggest problem with the myriad distributed VC systems out there
today is that they don't really integrate with the developer tools out
there (Eclipse, IntelliJ, Xcode, etc.).

The second biggest problem is that there are a bazillion of them and
no clear leader has emerged.

-Fitz, a clearly biased Subversion developer