[lug] Re: CVS and Subversion

[Sean Reifschneider]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 01:21:03PM -0600, Brennen Bearnes wrote:
>has me thinking I'll probably go with something else when I start
>using version control One Of These Days:

Hey, whatever lets you sleep at night...  If your primary usage of SVN is
going to be by using it via perl, the comment you posted is probably very
relevant.  However, most people use it from either Trac or via the
command-line tools, where the ugliness of the Perl bindings is irrelevant.

I switched to SVN around a year ago, primarily because I was unhappy with
CVS branching.  Mostly I didn't us CVS too hard, but one particular project
where I needed to be able to do branching.  SVN has worked extremely well,
since I switched to using the FSFS backend instead of the bsddb backend.
note that now the FSFS is the default.

Since the beginning of the year I've been experimenting with a number of
distributed version control systems including darcs, monotone, git,
bazaar-ng, mercurial...  Some of these I've used extenstively, some of
these I've just looked at.  darcs is probably the one I've used the most,
but most of my darcs repositories have also experienced corruption.  I most
likely darcs, but refuse to use it now because of the corruption.

SVN is absolutely rock solid.

Sean
-- 
 I'm one of the leading experts in the field of Data Mimeing.  Unfortunately,
 I'm not allowed to TELL you anything about it.  -- Sean Reifschneider, 1997
Sean Reifschneider, Member of Technical Staff <jafo at tummy.com>
tummy.com, ltd. - Linux Consulting since 1995: Ask me about High Availability