Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:57:30 -0500 | From | Eli Carter <> | Subject | Re: BK is *evil* corporate software [was Re: New BK License Problem?] |
| |
Larry McVoy wrote: [snip] > Everyone has to decide for themselves what make sense. I tend to agree > that paying for BK for a small number of seats doesn't make sense, > with a small number of people you can get by easily with CVS or one of > the other free tools. Eventually that will cause you problems and once > those problems are costing you money, then you may see that spending > that money on BK is actually a net reduction of cost.
Ok, honest question for you Larry:
Assume for the moment that I'm not eligible for the free BK license (I don't think that's the case, but for the question...). Assume that I plan a project that is going to start at 1 person and grow. Assume that at some point in the future, that project will grow large and complex enough to need BK.
What source control should I use _now_ so that I can grow into BK over time? Bonus question: Why? (The answer may be something like 'CVS -> Subversion -> ... -> BK', but I don't know.)
A little bit of background: In college I didn't know of source control. CVS was a godsend for me when I found it. But renames, copies, directories, dealing with multiple files in a change, those kinds of things "hurt" in CVS, even with just me. I want better tools, ideally open-source, but I suspect that I don't know what I'm looking for.
TIA,
Eli --------------------. "If it ain't broke now, Eli Carter \ it will be soon." -- crypto-gram eli.carter(a)inet.com `-------------------------------------------------
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |