Rich asked:
[...] CVS does not have the notion of a multi-file patch (same reason Linux doesn't use CVS).
What is "multi-file patch"? I've yet to encounter a reason -not- to use CVS.
First of all, fractint is not that complex a pprogram, and I have no doubt CVS would meet our needs. I really don't have a problem with CVS, and I'm actually getting a little experience with it at work. Having said that ... CVS is fundamentally file oriented, not patch or release oriented. A typical patch involves several files. There might even be several different patches that affect the same file. We could recover "patchlevel" information using dates. CVS also has a tag feature that I haven't used. CVS doesn't handle renaming files other than by deleting the old and creating the new (thereby losing the history. CVS handles binary files poorly (so I have read). Subversion is a program that aims to remedy these defects. I haven't seen it in so many words, but I get the impression that BitKeeper is the real target. See http://subversion.tigris.org/ Once again, fractint doesn't pose a huge problem, so CVS may be fine. Tim