[Gllug] CVS vs RCS

[Bruce Richardson]

On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 01:11:42PM +0000, TM wrote:
> 
> I understand that RCS is meant to be used by a single user;
> CVS when the project is a collaboration between various individuals.

Not true, RCS can deal with multiple users.  But it's designed to be
used in situ - the archive files are kept either in the same directory
as the working files or in a subdirectory thereof.  CVS, otoh, has a
central repository (on the same or a remote machine) from which you
check out a copy and with which you can synchronise as you choose.

RCS is lightweight and requires no set-up.  CVS is far more powerful but
a bit of a dog to administer, frankly.  It's the standard, though.

> 
> What I haven't been able to figure out yet is if any of the two
> software packages assumes that the computer that runs the server
> is always on.

With RCS this isn't an issue, as if the current files are accessible
then so are the archives.  With CVS, you synchonise with the remote
server when you want to download the changes others have made or upload
your updates.  Otherwise there is no link between the machines and
neither needs to be on all the time.

> 
> I want to have a server on my home PC running Linux (maybe duplicating
> the server at work, running Solaris). The box at home is not always
> switched on, like the machine at work. Can anyone tell me if this is
> going to be a problem please?

Not at all.  You simply need the CVS server to be up whenever you commit
(upload your changes) or update (download everyone else's).

-- 
Bruce

A problem shared brings the consolation that someone else is now
feeling as miserable as you.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 261 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/gllug/attachments/20020920/a75d0219/attachment.pgp>