Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!cmcl2!phri!roy From: roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) Newsgroups: comp.text Subject: Using RCS for manuscripts Message-ID: <2544@phri.UUCP> Date: Sat, 20-Dec-86 15:55:27 EST Article-I.D.: phri.2544 Posted: Sat Dec 20 15:55:27 1986 Date-Received: Sun, 21-Dec-86 08:35:45 EST Reply-To: roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) Followup-To: comp.text Distribution: world Organization: Public Health Research Inst. (NY, NY) Lines: 27 [sci.research isn't really right for this; followups to comp.text] This is sort of a funny question, but I'd like to know what kinds of experiences people have had using RCS to maintain text documents (as opposed to source code). Clearly it's feasable, but I'm thinking more of the human factors; my target population is a bunch of scientists who know enough about Unix to deal with emacs, troff, eqn, bib, and tbl, and to do data analysis using canned applications. By and large, (although there is a wide distribution) they are not programmers or real computer types. A lot of what we do is manuscripts and grant applications; both would benefit from RCSification. Right now, for example, I've got two people working on a grant application, with separate copies of the files rapidly growing more and more divergent (one likes Times, the other Helvetica; that's the only way they keep their printed copies straight). Anway, I don't need a sales pitch on RCS/SCCS (I already use RCS and love it). What I'm really after are opinions as to whether it is practical to teach a non-computer type how to use RCS, and have the value they get out of it exceed the effort they had to put into learning Yet Another Thing. -- Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 "you can't spell deoxyribonucleic without unix!"