cvs vs svn... (Re: SOURCES: ghostscript-afpl-am.patch (NEW), ghostscript-afpl-ijs_pkg...)

[Paweł Sakowski]

On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 11:30 +0200, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 of September 2005 11:20, wrobell wrote:
> 
> > i think (let's skip svn for now), we need:
> > - atomic commit (so we can commit patches and specs with one move
> >   and revert it easily later if there is a need)
> - easier work on branches without messing the way it recently happened with 
> some patches used by k(l)ex.spec and kernel.spec at the same time
> 
> these two things are most important for me

I'll add checking the changes two tags/branches (both spec and patches,
either as `cvs log` or `cvs diff`). Impossible now without visual
inspection of the spec for a list of {exist,{dis,}appear}ing patches.

Oh, and it's kindda sick that we need a script of 1781 lines to simply
fetch a given version (spec+patches).

-- 
Paweł Sakowski <saq at pld-linux.org>
PLD Linux Distribution