[cvsnt] Opinion: open source-"supported" CVS backup capabilities are very weak
tony.hoyle at march-hare.com
Mon Jan 7 11:10:38 GMT 2008
Philip Bondi wrote:
> The simple CVS repository backup solution using RSYNC works fine on
> LANs or low cost WANs. However, a CVS TAG operation that affects a
> large group of files will cause retransmission of entire RCS archive
RSYNC only transmits those parts of a file that have changed. For a tag
operation this is very small, so whilst it will affect many files the
amount of data sent is not going to be large at all.
We regularly sync between repositories using both rsync and unison, and
the bandwidth requirements of such syncing aren't particularly high.
What kind of size of repository are we talking about?
As far as your other points go, nobody has turned their back on
anything. There are at least 4 cvs based projects that I know of (on
the server side.. dozens on the client side). As someone who's worked
with the protocol for many years I have a lot of respect for it.. it's
stood the test of time and works well (and, most importantly, reliably).
I (and march hare, who pay me to do this) have absolutely no intention
of stopping support for it... indeed quite the opposite. I don't think
Derek Price over at the 'traditional cvs' camp has any intention of
slowing down either. The next year is going to be very interesting..
especially once evs gets thrown into the mix.
More information about the cvsnt