Mark Rages wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Gerhard Fiedler > wrote: >> Mark Rages wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Gerhard Fiedler >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Zipping code manually is nothing really different from using a >>>> version control system, it's just that the latter provides more >>>> comfortable (and quicker) to use commands for the commonly required >>>> actions. >>> >>> Well, there is history tracking across branches, interactive merging, >>> diffs between arbitrary revisions, automated bisection testing... >> >> Sure... nothing you couldn't do with a history of manually zipped >> directory trees plus their necessary metadata. >> >> In case this wasn't clear: the out-of-context snip above was replying to >> someone who said he uses zipped trees instead of repos. My point was >> that it's the same, just that a repo is more comfortable (and quicker) >> to use. >> >> Do you disagree? >=20 > Of course, the zipped files have all the data.=20 >=20 > But SVN keeps track of branches (aka copies) and merges. This is > useful data that the zipped trees will not have. Suppose for example > you find a showstopper bug in your init code, and you need to find > which project you copied the file from, and what other projects it > has been copied to. SVN will tell you, because it kept track.=20 It seems you missed the part where I wrote "plus their necessary metadata". You /can/ do all what a version control system does manually -- it's just a lot of painstaking work.=20 I don't quite understand your point here, though. My point was (and is) that you don't lose anything by moving from the zipping method to a decent version control system. Again: do you disagree? Gerhard --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .