-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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:
http://interreality.org/pipermail/vos-d/2005-May/thread.html#1339
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 ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDjKl7aeHUyhjCHfcRAkptAJwPNCdRQcslkIWQfJA5cwAzLY75eACfab0i
WK/iLjPIB7PgUoRZOTdhIoc=
=u7K/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
vos-d mailing list
vos-d@interreality.org
http://www.interreality.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vos-d
