Thanks for all your input. We decided to give Subversion a try to see
whether we like it or not.
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Matt Doar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "S I" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Subversion
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 15:18:58 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from postale.fourelle.com ([67.131.234.90]) by
mc10-f29.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 18 Jul 2005
15:15:46 -0700
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jEmVw53PO+6Vzk50Gbx29CcLNYMOOsLkU4=
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Subversion
Thread-Index: AcWL471OqS4IIBFeQdO/I63ueDmVMAAAhRYA
Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2005 22:15:46.0949 (UTC)
FILETIME=[3F3AE350:01C58BE6]
> I read the user
> reviews at the bottom of Subversion homepage and they were not good
> overall.
You should read more widely than that. There are plenty of
CVS/Subversion comparisons available through Google.
> So I'm very hesitant now, especially that you mention server
stability
> issues with Subversion. Not to mention Subversion is only @ version
1. If
> I
> ever switch, I'd rather wait it out couple of versions.
It'll be a while. Subversion chose to stay in beta for years before
reaching 1.0. They don't seem to be driven by marketing tags.
>
> Speaking of versions, when is CVS going to give us major features like
> Clearcase, Perforce, or Subversions: Directory versioning, renaming,
etc?
>
Part of the history of Subversion was to create just these sort of
features in a new code base. Major changes to CVS such as directory
versioning would indeed surprise me, though pleasantly.
My personal take right now is that if a project is successfully using
CVS, then all of the people involved should be very clear about what
they don't get from CVS and very convincing about why they need to have
it. For a new code base, I'd probably try Subversion.
~Matt
> Thanks.
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Rahul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Subversion
> Date: 18 Jul 2005 12:40:38 -0700
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by mc9-f22.hotmail.com
> with
> Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:43:52 -0700
> Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)by
lists.gnu.org
> with esmtp (Exim 4.43)id 1DubYo-0005oz-2Efor [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon,
18
> Jul
> 2005 15:45:54 -0400
> X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFdmvxFQMGoPBXXj2SEi34ue+6yLAJmc2U=
> Path:
>
shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!g43g2000cw
a.
> googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
> Newsgroups: gnu.cvs.help
> Followup-To: gnu.cvs.help
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Lines: 26
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.160.228.194
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1121715645 7768 127.0.0.1 (18 Jul 2005
> 19:40:45GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:40:45 +0000 (UTC)
> User-Agent: G2/0.2
> Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Injection-Info: g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com;
> posting-host=67.160.228.194;posting-account=kmVp-
> w0AAAC1bOHtjbScQrAMpQ3PN4hg
> Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.cvs.help:45698
> X-BeenThere: [email protected]
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
> Precedence: list
> List-Id: Announcements and discussions for the CVS version control
> system<info-cvs.nongnu.org>
> List-Unsubscribe:
> <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs>,<mailto:info-cvs-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/info-cvs>
> List-Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
> List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> List-Subscribe:
> <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs>,<mailto:info-cvs-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2005 19:43:53.0199 (UTC)
> FILETIME=[0702FFF0:01C58BD1]
>
> Hi Steve -
>
> We our in the course of producing a Subversion Replicator just like
our
> CVS Replicator. Talking with Subversion admins and users we do come
> across one issue regularly - transaction deadlocks - with Berkeley
db
> backend.
>
> Some admins routinely restart the Subversion server when they
encounter
> it. Most of the time that is enough to fix the issue. Seems to us that
> they need to work out the stability part more.
>
> There is dependence of Berkeley db if you want any transactional
> support. File system backend will not provide you that. You can search
> for issues with Berkeley db. On SMP boxes issues with deadlocks and
> concurrency control have been around for a while. SVN with Bdb backend
> inherits all that.
>
> Also these days most IDEs (Eclipse, WebSphere, Ideaj etc) have CVS
> support built-in. There are far more 3rd party tools and plug-ins for
> CVS just by it being there longer.
>
> Regards,
> Rahul Bhargava
> CTO, WANdisco,
> http://www.wandisco.com/cvs
>
> _______________________________________________
> Info-cvs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Info-cvs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
