Re: subversion vs cvs (Was: Re: linked list rewrite)

On Mar 24, 2004, at 7:29, Frank Wiles wrote:

> [cool feature list]
Arch has all of that except for the checking out part of a directory 
thing  (would you really just check out the backend, submit a change, 
and not build and test it?).
Additionally:
* Repositories can be easily replicated so checkouts don't have to 
cross slow networks.  I replicate every repository I work with to every 
machine I use.  This is not only my backup strategy, but it makes 
checkouts faster.
* You can work completely offline.  In addition to being able to diff, 
undo changes, redo changes, etc... while offline, you can completely 
branch a project do multiple commits, and merge them back into the main 
archive when your plane lands.
* Branches are not only cheap, but can easily cross repository 
boundaries.  Any given user can create a branch from the head-of-line 
tree and maintain changes, and the head-of-line maintainers can pull 
those changes back in.
* Its storage is immutable.  It never modifies a file so it does not 
provide any possibility for corruption.  This is also what makes 
replication so trivial.
* Changesets have cryptographic checksums and may be cryptographically 
signed.  Checkouts are authenticated against both of these.
* Repositories can be accessed via a wide variety of means.  Most of 
mine are local file, WebDAV, or SFTP.  I allow read-only access via 
plain HTTP for anyone who wants to check out one of my projects.
* Files can be tracked in a nearly (or completely) automatic fashion.  
Depending on project configuration, you can avoid having to interact 
with the revision control system other than writing changelogs and 
submitting patches.  You an also use CVS-style tracking (manual adds 
and deletes (plus moves)) if you're more comfortable that way.
* The design is way, way more simple and transparent, there are far 
fewer requirements.  At least for me, this translates to a higher 
confidence that my stuff will always be available.

The advantage I see to Subversion is that it's designed to be a better 
CVS.  Since many people are comfortable with CVS and that style of 
centralized development, it may feel a little more natural for new 
converts.  I feel that that's because it doesn't seem to take you very 
far.

-- 
Dustin Sallings