Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!dover!digital!chen
From: chen@digital.sps.mot.com (Jinfu Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: RCS -vs- SCCS (was Re: rcs for SysV)
Message-ID: <464dc8d9.81da@digital.sps.mot.com>
Date: 18 Oct 89 16:47:28 GMT
References: <6552@ficc.uu.net> <77@venice.SEDD.TRW.COM> <1989Oct18.033152.2035@pcrat.uucp>
Reply-To: chen@digital.sps.MOT.COM (Jinfu Chen)
Organization: Motorola, Inc. Logic IC Div, Mesa, AZ
Lines: 22

>
>However, to answer the question, I switched to RCS because out of
>the box it already had a decent user interface and I was tired of
>having to reinvent for the Nth time a usable interface to SCCS.

Ditto here. Being a novice user to software resource control, I learned both SCCS and
RCS recently and found that RCS is the one for me. It only took me less than half an
hour to learn and start using it.

>I also like the fact that the ID keywords ($Id$, $Log$) are preserved
>and *expanded* even in a checked out for modification copy.

Yes, this is another reason I like RCS. Perhaps I have a lousy memory, that twenty
cryptical SCCS keywords keep me away from SCCS.


-- 
Jinfu Chen                  (602)898-5338      |       Disclaimer:
Motorola, Inc.  Logic IC Div., Mesa, AZ        | 
...{somewhere}!uunet!dover!digital!chen        | My employer doesn't pay
chen@digital.sps.mot.com                       | me to express opinions.
----------