[lug] Re: CVS and Subversion

[Garett Shulman]

Brennen Bearnes wrote:
>
> I don't use subversion, let alone knowing enough to say whether he's
> right or wrong, but a friend of mine recently posted a take on it that
> has me thinking I'll probably go with something else when I start
> using version control One Of These Days:
>
> http://blogs.thegotonerd.com/maelstrom/archives/000658.html
>
> An excerpt:
>
> "(1) SVN has many serious architectural / performance flaws.
> Programming on SVN's swig-generated perl bindings over the last 6
> months forced me to look them in the eye. They're ugly. I'll list them
> off in some subsequent post. The upshot is that SVN won't scale well
> to the enterprise level no matter how much snake oil CollabNet pours
> on it." 
The University of Colorado System uses SVN. It is very easy to 
administer. It is used by nearly 50 developers & admins. It is integral 
to deployment of over 30 projects to over 40 hosts. It's fast. It is 
light on disk space as it uses deltas (contrary to Brennen's friends 
blog post). And it integrates seamlessly with our AD. This may 
immediately discredit me amongst y'all but I would rather code in ruby, 
java, c/c++, python, or bash then perl :) . So, I can't really speak 
about the SVN API binding to Perl mentioned by Brennen's friend. I think 
that the GUI client, TortoiseSVN, leaves quite a bit to be desired. 
However, the commandline clinet for linux & windows works very well. -Garett