The Hermit Hacker wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
> > > > What is the ideal setup to have when contributing to PG development?
> > > AFAIK, the main advantage of CVSup is that you have a complete copy of
> > > the CVS archive on your own machine, which means you can examine cvs
> > > commit log messages, pull old versions, and so forth without having
> > > to contact hub.org. If you just use "cvs update" periodically then
> > > you only have the current sources, and have to use remote cvs to do
> > > things like checking log messages.
> >
> > The other principle advantage to CVSup is its efficiency in bringing
> > over updates. It is very fast and really minimizes the bandwidth.
>
> Is this less then when using the -z option for CVS?
I believe so. I'm just guessing at CVS's behavior, but I *know* that
CVSup only sends compressed diffs of the changes to update a cvs
repository or a checked-out tree. afaik CVS sends the entire file,
compressing it for transmission much as does CVSup.
> > Or find that hub.org disappears occasionally, or...
> We think we just licked that problem...
Not entirely, unless you can guarantee uptime on Internet routing. I
see outages on occasion which I don't think are local to hub.org.
That's no news to anyone, but it does seem relevant when discussing
the merits of local vs remote repositories.
- Thomas
--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California