3 ms·
Nice article but the conclusion doesn't really follow from how the article is build up. > It illustrates well why understanding the history of software develop
by craigsmansion 8y ago
Nice article but the conclusion doesn't really follow from how the article is build up.
> It illustrates well why understanding the history of software development can be so beneficial—picking up and re-examining obsolete tools will teach you volumes about the why behind the tools we use today.
As the article re-examines this obsolete version management tool, it becomes clear it's pretty easy and straightforward and can do a lot of things that git can to a certain degree. On top of that it's dead-easy to setup and use, in fact, its simplicity might be an indication that's it's not all that obsolete and might be exactly the right fit for new small personal projects.
- bronson 8y agoThose are some really optimistic takeaways. I hope you'll try CVS and report back (especially a merge, or looking at project history including deleted files). I don't think any of these statements will stand up to scrutiny.
- craigsmansion 8y agoI am using CVS (and even RCS) and for small personal projects, it's perfect. Maybe there are problems with merges or project history in a larger context, but as things are, at the end of the day, I type the single command `cvs commit' and have a magic backup with revision history as a bonus. Sometimes that's all a project needs.