Well, 'old' is no criteria. The GCC version used for mspgcc is pretty old yet it does its job. Same for most everything else (including ourselves :) ) Where so you set a mark when something is too old to be used (even if still under development)? 1 day? 1 week? 1 month? 1 year? Als long as it does the job, fine, And if not, it might be a young as can be and still useless. 'Slow' is relative. I can't really compare. The slowest thing here is our server (which has been really misconfigured by generations of admins). So I cannot determine if the (normally barely noticeable) delays are caused by SVN or by the server file access itself. And for the need of a server, well, yes, sure. Every repository needs to be stored somewhere. Without access to the storage place I cannot access the repository. No matter whether it is a dedicated server, some webspace somewhere or a mesh cloud.
But it was just an idea. With everything else I looked upon (quick glances only, admitted) it seemed to me I'd be more busy handling the repository than working with the project. When choosing my tools, my top citeria is always usability (and maybe price, which had lead me originally to mspgcc). JMGross ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ----- Von: Dmitry Zuikov An: [email protected] Gesendet am: 28.September.2009 17:59:15 Betreff: Re: [Mspgcc-users] Developers: Bazaar branches > Has anyone thought of using SubVersion? > It offers cheap branches, a nice and easy-to-use UI under Windows > (TortoiseSVN) und much more. Yes of course. It's so old. And so slow. It needs a server...
