🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3952@ima.ima.isc.com> johnl@ima.UUCP (John R. Levine) writes:
>In article <1374@westmark.UUCP> dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) writes:
>>I'm looking for an SCCS-clone for MS-DOS. ...
>>I use Microsoft C and MASM.  I currently use Microsoft MAKE.  ...
>
>I've had good experience with Polytron's PVCS...
	I, too, have good experience with PVCS.  About a year and a half
	ago, we used PVCS on a project with 4 developers and an integrator.
	It worked well enough.  My major complaint at the time was
	the lack of knowledge of who had checked out a file, but we
	were using the "personal" version on a file server; I believe
	they now have a "networked" version, and that would be a
	natural difference to implement.

>Microsoft "make" is the worst excuse for a make program that I have ever seen.
	Hear, hear!  It's really a toy.  Get yourself a tool.
	The MAKE from Turbo C is good, as are Don Kneller's two MAKEs,
	the shareware NDMAKE and commercial OPUS make.

	HOWEVER... if you use PVCS, it's worth getting PolyMAKE from
	PolyTron.  It's as good as the others (each has its pros and cons),
	and it knows about PVCS archives.  I was able to implement some
	Makefiles for the integrator that allowed version-specific
	manufacture, while the ordinary developers could do very
	efficient latest-version makes.  It would have been
	clumsy-to-impossible to accomplish this with a MAKE that
	didn't know how to read PVCS archives.

+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|    Dave Tutelman						|
|    Physical - AT&T Bell Labs  -  Middletown, NJ		|
|    Logical -  ...att!mtunb!dmt				|
|    Audible -  (201) 957 6583					|
+---------------------------------------------------------------+