On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Tom P <zomm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Curt
>
> My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local
> file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For
> example, right now a complete checkout of Aircraft is ~ 2 GB, and it would
> double overnight.
>
> I know, disk space is cheap in these days, but the double-write also
> results in slower checkouts.
> In other words, I think we should import FlightGear as well into
> code.google.com and see if we are happy with the performance before
> jumping.
>
> Apart from this concern, I've used CVS, SVN and GIT and I'm not religious
> about the choice.
> In the end, any tool will work as long as it's:
> - fast
> - easy to use
> - well integrated with other tools like bug tracking SW <----- and this
> is very important IMHO
> (you have bugs referring to check-ins, check-ins referring to bugs, RSS
> feeds of changes, etc ...)
>
I've used a few as well, though not Mercurial (the other available system
on Google Code). I'm partial to git, and if mercurial is similar (which I
believe it is), it's a lot more robust than SVN. It might make sense to go
directly to Mercurial (maybe going through SVN, then Mercurial, if the tools
are better for that). Even if the distriguted aspect were not an issue (I
believe it is!), SVN is lacking in some aspects.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
