From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15427 invoked by alias); 14 Oct 2011 15:47:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 15409 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Oct 2011 15:47:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:46:55 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9EFkpVv003866 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:46:51 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-16.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.16]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9EFkmWM015432 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:46:50 -0400 Received: from host1.jankratochvil.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p9EFklad030424; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:46:47 +0200 Received: (from jkratoch@localhost) by host1.jankratochvil.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p9EFkkie030418; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:46:46 +0200 Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:49:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: "Joseph S. Myers" Cc: "Alfred M. Szmidt" , pmuldoon@redhat.com, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GIT and CVS Message-ID: <20111014154646.GA30295@host1.jankratochvil.net> References: <20111014060106.GA9490@host1.jankratochvil.net> <20111014070117.GA14467@host1.jankratochvil.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-10/txt/msg00139.txt.bz2 On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:38:37 +0200, Joseph S. Myers wrote: > I really don't think this is an argument for one version control system > over another. They all seem to make it far too easy to commit patches > where you've accidentally failed to add new files to version control. The point was to ensure the same version control system is used both locally and server-side. Which requires dVCS. Which excludes for example SVN (and also CVS). I had a fear CVS may be considered as a valid VCS. Thanks, Jan