[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration
From: |
Gregory John Casamento |
Subject: |
Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration |
Date: |
Thu, 13 Oct 2005 08:48:47 -0700 (PDT) |
MJ,
--- MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
> Jeremy Tregunna <jtregunna@blurgle.ca> wrote:
> [private message posted to a mailing list]
>
> First you send me a message off-list without a cc to the list,
> (but also send a copy to list, unknown to me at that time) then
> you post my reply to the off-list one here. Dirty sneaky troll.
Ummm. This probably just means that he forgot to hit reply-all, a common
mistake which I'm sure we've all made. No need to be snippy. ;)
> The drawbacks of SVN remain:
> * non-distributed (same as CVS)
> * incompatible with the git-using tools (same as CVS)
> * poor library licence limits integration
> * client at least fivefold more disk, probably bigger in memory too
> * not supported at savannah
> * reconfigure everything now, only to move again soon
Advantages include: (i.e. features CVS lacks)
* Actively developed, CVS hasn't seen many releases lately
* Versions directories, file meta data, etc.
* Handles file renames without the need to remove and re-add a file to the
repo.
* Atomic commits. In CVS, if an error occurs during commit, it's likely that
some changes made it and others didn't. A bad situation.
* Efficient handling of binary files.
* Parseable output makes scripting easier.
For a full list of features (not necessarily advantages) of SVN, go to
http://subversion.tigris.org/.
The only thing I saw when reviewing the feature set that I do not like is the
fact that branching and tagging are both handled by doing a "copy in the
repository" and that it is possible for someone to sync to a tag and modify the
contents of the tag in the same way they would if using a branch in CVS.
On the surface this sounds bad, but you can almost as easily check out a set of
files in CVS and move a tag to a new version of a file, thus modifying the tag.
SVN just makes this particular sin a little easier to commit (pardon the pun).
> ..and that's all obvious before use. Once in use, other quirks
> and limitations become obvious. Can't we do better?
I have yet to review arch, so I can't say if it would be a better choice.
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
> Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
>
Later, GJC
Gregory John Casamento
-- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A MD Corp.)
## Maintainer of Gorm (IB Equiv.) for GNUstep.
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, (continued)
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/12
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/12
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Markus Hitter, 2005/10/12
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/13
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Rogelio M. Serrano Jr., 2005/10/13
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/13
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Nicola Pero, 2005/10/13
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Andrew Ruder, 2005/10/13
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration,
Gregory John Casamento <=
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Jeremy Tregunna, 2005/10/14
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/14
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/14
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Alex Perez, 2005/10/15
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Adrian Robert, 2005/10/15
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Alex Perez, 2005/10/15
- Message not available
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, MJ Ray, 2005/10/18
- Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Helge Hess, 2005/10/18
Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Roland Schwingel, 2005/10/13
Re: Proposal: Subversion Migration, Christopher Armstrong, 2005/10/14