Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Lalo Martins wrote:

And so says Peter Amstutz on 11/29/05 22:46...
I'm thinking about migrating the VOS source repository from CVS to SVN.

As I said last time the issue was raised, I completely despise SVN.
It's only incrementally better than CVS; anyone who ever used a
distributed SCM can never go back to SVN.

What's your take on SVK (http://svk.elixus.org/) ? It's a distributed version control system built on top of subversion. The gist of it seems to be that it is a replacement manager for the local working copy; it keeps a local SVN repository that mirrors an upstream repository (with fully history), so you can make changes to local branches which are kept in local version control, and then periodically synchronize with other repositories as needed. It would appear that it is entirely possible to use the centeral repository with *both* the SVN and SVK clients.

But mostly - you praise SVN's branching, compared to CVS; but it has no
actual branches, just a very stupid hack of using its ability to track
cross-file changes, to *simulate* branching.  Proper branches can be
kept independently, and cross-merged; SVN "branches" can make all your
hair white if you need cross-merging.

Well clearly I'm biased, since I make 80% of the commits to the VOS repository, and I don't presently use branching, it's not high on my list of requiriments for a new version control system :-) The other features I mentioned in my email, however, are quite important.

If you need more arguments, look for the previous thread on the
archives, where I diss SVN some more. ;-)

Well, here's the previous thread on this topic, so we can avoid re-fighting any battles:


Please, if you want to upgrade, go all the way.  Monotone, Mercurial, or
even Cogito, will be much more liberating.  My personal recommendation
continues to be Bazaar-NG, which is now much more stable and has pretty
much all the features we need.

While I'm not questioning your judgement (and I haven't done the research you have), you haven't yet made a case for how one of these other systems would provide a specific compelling advantage that we would not get by going to SVN. I'd also like to hear your opinion on SVK, as it might provide a compromise -- allowing some people to do disconnected development and branching, while allowing others to use conventional, more tightly coupled SVN clients with the same repository.

[   Peter Amstutz   ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED]  ]
[Lead Programmer][Interreality Project][Virtual Reality for the Internet]
[ VOS: Next Generation Internet Communication][ http://interreality.org ]
[ http://interreality.org/~tetron ][ pgpkey:  pgpkeys.mit.edu  18C21DF7 ]
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)


vos-d mailing list

Reply via email to