3 ms·
> Source control was very, very standard 15 years ago. For commercial shops, perhaps. But back then the bar for using source control was much, much higher, so
by TimTheTinker 8y ago
> Source control was very, very standard 15 years ago.
For commercial shops, perhaps. But back then the bar for using source control was much, much higher, so for many small projects, people didn't bother. There wasn't anything as simple as `git init`.
There were a few public CVS and SVN servers that were appropriate for open source projects, but for anything personal or commercial, you had to use a local, single-user repo or set up your own server. (Back then, the only viable DVCS systems were commercial.)
- pessimizer 8y ago> you had to set up your own server. That was like 5 minutes of work, though. Maybe an hour or two if you hadn't done it before. It's absurdly easy to set up and use SVN. CVS was easy to set up, but a nightmare to use. > you had to use a local, single-user repo or set up your own server. That's the opposite of having no source control, that's having source control.
- xorcist 8y agoSourceforge is almost 20 years old now, and offered version control free of charge. For a while it was almost as dominant in the free software world as github is now. The FreeBSD CVS archive is 25 years old. Version control was absolutely mainstream back then.
- TimTheTinker 8y ago> Version control was absolutely mainstream back then. I’m not arguing with that, only pointing out that it wasn’t ubiquitous.
- astura 8y agoSorry, no, this just isn't true.