25 lines
899 B
Text
25 lines
899 B
Text
|
$NetBSD: patch-doc_opencm.texi,v 1.1 2014/09/24 21:25:54 jperkin Exp $
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
--- doc/opencm.texi.orig 2003-02-15 04:53:00.000000000 +0000
|
||
|
|
+++ doc/opencm.texi
|
||
|
|
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ coming.}
|
||
|
|
* Holding Buffer:: Text I don't know what to do with.
|
||
|
|
@end menu
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
-@section Why Another CM System?
|
||
|
|
+@chapter Why Another CM System?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
In the open source world, the current ``gold standard'' for
|
||
|
|
configuration management is @uref{http://www.cvshome.org,CVS}. CVS has
|
||
|
|
@@ -218,8 +218,8 @@ of disconnected development.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Effective disconnected development needs to preserve history as well as
|
||
|
|
patches. Patch integration just isn't effective or scalable, as the
|
||
|
|
-Linux (@fix{what is an appropriate link for Linux?}) project has
|
||
|
|
-demonstrated.
|
||
|
|
+Linux project has demonstrated.
|
||
|
|
+@fix{what is an appropriate link for Linux?}
|
||
|
|
@end itemize
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
There are several existing alternatives to CVS, each with strengths and
|