Hi! On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 09:31:30AM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote: > The former is not a requirement for the latter. I know that > Subversion is better than CVS in pretty much every way, and is the > heir apparent to the open source version control crown for that > reason, but you can set up anonymous readonly access to a CVS > repository with significantly less work than migrating the whole thing > to SVN. Having anonymous and non anonymous access to a CVS archive is inherently insecure. This was the reason why I've decided against the former. SVN is pretty secure when used via a web server using DAV. So if I will change anything, SVN is probably the way to go. Regards Uz -- Ullrich von Bassewitz uz@musoftware.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Mon Mar 31 20:16:18 2008
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2008-03-31 20:16:20 CEST