[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In AProduc

• From: Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>
• To: Len Bullard <cbullard@hiwaay.net>
• Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 22:39:34 -0400

On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 19:18 -0500, Len Bullard wrote:
> The subject has the question.
> 
>  
> 
> Assembling a free to near free environment for multiple authors working on
> multiple projects where some must be able to simultaneously edit then merge
> XML and illustrations, is free CVS a practical means?

If they are not editing the same parts of the same file, CVS is fine.

It's not as shiny and new as "git" but there are graphical tools for
most operating systems.

Subversion is the oldest of the CVS replacements and as others have
said, may be easier to administer, but we use CVS at W3C and by and
large it's fine.  It scales up to reasonable sizes (e.g. a few gigabytes
is fine), in some ways better than git since it doesn't require everyone
to have a local copy of the repository. Don't try "git clone" on
dialup :-)

Sure, the diffs are line based, so it helps to use editors that are
stable in untouched parts of the document, and to turn on indenting with
spaces.

Liam

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In A Production Environment
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>

• References:
  • Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In A Production Environment
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@hiwaay.net>