[Info-vax] Where to locate software

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2016-06-15 01:55, Craig A. Berry wrote:
> On 6/14/16 8:52 AM, Bob Koehler wrote:
>> In article <njnoq5$tjj$1 at dont-email.me>, "Craig A. Berry"
>> <craigberry at nospam.mac.com> writes:
>>>
>>> The "D" in DVCS stands for distributed. If you have to wait for someone
>>> else to finish with a file before you can work on it, you're doing the
>>> opposite of distributed development and are defeating concurrency in
>>> your development process. Too much locking increases contention in human
>>> systems as well as software systems.
>>
>>    Exactly the comment I was expecting.
>>
>>    If you think locking means no concurrent development, you don't know
>>    electronic CM systems very well.  Unlocked access is only one way to
>>    achieve concurrency.
>
> I was responding to Kerry, whose goal is "to prevent code from being
> updated" when one developer has something checked out. The fact that
> some centralized VCS's can allow a degree of concurrency via branching
> is beside the point in that scenario. And you'll very likely still find
> locking per branch and have to choose between branching by feature and
> branching by developer. With a DVCS you don't have to choose.

I've been trying to keep out of this thread, but could people just 
clarify one thing for me. What is CVS and SVN classified as here? Are 
they distributed version control systems, or centralized?

Because the normal flow of work is never that you lock files when 
working on them in these systems, but I did get the impressions that 
people classified them as centralized. Which then confuses me, as people 
somehow put an equal sign between centralized and locking.

And if CVS and SVN are defined as distributed, then what is the argument 
between them and GIT about?

	Johnny