commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Rall <...@finemaltcoding.com>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Scamp: Source Control Abstraction
Date Thu, 03 Oct 2002 00:33:59 GMT
"Craig R. McClanahan" <craigmcc@apache.org> writes:

> On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Steve Downey wrote:
> 
> > Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 19:13:59 -0400
> > From: Steve Downey <steve.downey@netfolio.com>
> > Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Proposal] Scamp: Source Control Abstraction
> >
> > On Tuesday 17 September 2002 06:15 pm, Daniel Rall wrote:
> > > In what ways does this differ from DAV?
> > A SCM system can sit on top of DAV, or DAV + deltaV. Subversion, for example,
> > is using deltaV as the communication protocol between its client and server.
> > But DAV, in and of itself, isn't a generic SCM protocol.
> >
> > Certainly CVS doesn't speak DAV.
> >
> 
> But Subversion does, doesn't it?

Yes, it does.  It implements a sub-set of DAV (I assume it may
implement more as development continues to progress).
-- 

Daniel Rall <dlr@finemaltcoding.com>

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message