From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3c8a1ddc13ecb354 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Configuration Management for Ada on Unix Date: 1996/05/30 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 157593257 references: <4nvm27$e68@gde.GDEsystems.COM> <31A39EB4.15FB7483@escmail.orl.mmc.com> <4o4pup$h7n@scapin.enst.fr> <31A79E0A.2F99@hiwaay.net> <4o94io$5ai@foehn.enst.fr> <4oi2s7$fbm@noc2.drexel.edu> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-05-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Chris says " This inefficiency has a nice advantage, though. Let's say you have three modifications, A, B, and C, which affect the original version of a program. Using the method which stores only *modifications* to the base file, you can selectively create a version which incorporates only the modifications A and C, while leaving out those in B. With the way RCS works, the changes in B are inherently a part of C, and cannot be bypassed." This makes no sense at all. Of coures you can do this with RCS. The method in which the informatoin is stored affects only the retrieval times for various kinds of access, not what information can be accessed. You might claim that the operation you suggest would be slower on RCS, which is true since RCS optimizes the (by FAR most common) process of obtaining the last version, but since you can obtain all versions, of course you can do this operation. Just think for a moment. If you decide that the only way of doing your operation is to have the modification steps, then just create them from the appropriate versions. So what you end up saying is "this inefficiency has a nice advantage, some things are efficient." Yes, we know this already!