Re: cvs update vs. git pull

From: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
Date: May 28, 2010, 09:35 UTC
Message-ID: <4BFF8E56.7050805@op5.se>
In-Reply-To: <d876ae6b75ab8d9debe5b97f84a4386a.squirrel@resmo.ch>

On 05/28/2010 11:21 AM, René Moser wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Hi
> 
> I use git since a while for my own projects (how surprise).
> 
> The company I work for still uses a CVS(nt), and this sucks, time to
> changed that. We have a use case we often have problems with. If git would
> solve this problem, I would really have a good arg for the managers.
> 
> The codebase managed by CVS is quite huge and therefore we have daily and
> nightly builds.
> 
> One problem we have is, that if there is a commit to cvs while the cvs
> update of the build job is running (and this takes 20 minutes), then we
> get some inconsistence, the build will fail.
> 
> So the question is, if we would use git, this inconsistence would not be
> possible because the git pull will get the state of the sha1. Right?
>

Right.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.