From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 7681dfe2 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 06:26:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E10D3948C8; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7852D947C8; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:25 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 5E0D7947C8; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:23 +1000 (AEST) X-Greylist: delayed 848 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at minnie.tuhs.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:22 AEST Received: from mx0b-0024d301.pphosted.com (mx0b-0024d301.pphosted.com [148.163.153.159]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB2E194797 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 16:26:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0101816.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0024d301.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id x8C6BYGV000623; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 02:12:12 -0400 Received: from acrbarmx03.acrisurellc.com (customer-74-204-12-113.host.ussignalcom.net [74.204.12.113]) by mx0a-0024d301.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2uy0agnm1f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 02:12:11 -0400 Received: from ACRBARMX05.AcrisureLLC.com (10.1.240.102) by ACRBARMX03.AcrisureLLC.com (10.1.240.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 02:12:10 -0400 Received: from ACRBARMX05.AcrisureLLC.com ([fe80::3957:4f52:77e3:11d1]) by ACRBARMX05.AcrisureLLC.com ([fe80::3957:4f52:77e3:11d1%17]) with mapi id 15.00.1367.000; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 02:12:10 -0400 From: William Corcoran To: Larry McVoy Thread-Topic: [TUHS] SCCS Thread-Index: AQHVaRx4S5h2LwI5S0iSrxLOSel3lKcntd6AgAABUQD//9iehQ== Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 06:12:10 +0000 Message-ID: <03956472-B6A1-4E83-B2F1-0FE855C75C15@jctaylor.com> References: <20190911181101.GF3143@mcvoy.com> <20190912034346.GJ2046@mcvoy.com> , <20190912043308.GL2046@mcvoy.com> In-Reply-To: <20190912043308.GL2046@mcvoy.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=bulkpolcyenabled_notspam policy=bulkpolcyenabled score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1906280000 definitions=main-1909120065 Subject: Re: [TUHS] SCCS X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" Okay, while on the subject of SCCS and UNIX: Is there a UNIX (post SCCS) like System III or System V that still has all = of the original SCCS entries intact? =20 Would only production ready code be entered as an SCCS delta?=20 Or, would SCCS be used as a checkpoint tool to store unofficial versions (e= ven broken versions) of the UNIX codebase as development progressed on the = system as a whole? I would love to see all of the prs for the kernel and commands. =20 Truly, Bill Corcoran > On Sep 12, 2019, at 12:33 AM, Larry McVoy wrote: >=20 > Yeah, this was one of things that BitKeeper addressed. It was easier > to use and every commit was a tag. >=20 >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:28:25PM -0700, Jon Forrest wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> I used both RCS and SCCS in the early days (e.g. 1985 - 1991). RCS was >> what we used at Britton-Lee in the group that Eric Allman was part of. >> SCCS is what we used at Sybase as it was gaining popularity. This was >> so long ago that I don't remember all the details but I found that >> RCS was much easier to use, especially in an environment that didn't >> do much merging. Instead we used labels (or tags, I forget what they >> were called) to mark which files were part of which release. Doing >> this was much harder in SCCS, which contributed to the mess that >> was Sybase software engineering. >>=20 >> Of course, all this could be explained by Eric's deep knowledge >> of RCS, and the lack of somebody with Eric's knowledge at Sybase. >> But, to me, an early adopter of source code control who wasn't >> overly interested in speed, RCS was much easier to use. >>=20 >> Jon >=20 > --=20 > --- > Larry McVoy lm at mcvoy.com http://www.mc= voy.com/lm=20