[linux-dvb] Re: [OT] subversion [Was: Re: wiki?]

[Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@citd.de>]

On 08.09.2004 19:49, Wolfgang Fritz wrote:

> Good:
> 
> - Global version numbers. Version numbers belong to a commit, not to a file.
>
> Bad:
> 
> - Branching and tagging. Conceptual, there are no branches and tags in
> subversion. You have to emulate them by copy operations.

Seems like you haven't fully(tm) understand the concept of tags &
branches in subversion.

For braching/taging (which are the same in subversion) you create (to
use "easy" words) a "symlink" to the revision-nr of a directory.

In CVS this would me:
for every file create "symlink" for the relevant revision.
This can't be "better(tm)" than what subversion does

You wouldn't need branches/tags if you could remember all the revision
numbers (and directorys) yourself. Which would be quite possibel in
subversion but practicaly impossibel in CVS as you would have to remeber
the revisions of EVERY file whereas in subversion you only needed to
rember the directory(*) and the revision-number.


This is conceptionaly the best(tm) method i could think of, it is
extremly lightweight. Whereas in CVS it is a thing that was later
invented and the implementation is quite costly (i don't know how long
it takes to "tag" a project like mozilla, but i doesn't want to know it
either) and "risky" (If you interrupt the tagging/branching bad thing
may happen to your CVS repository.) as it is NOT "conceptionaly
integreated(tm)"



For "stability". I've been using subversion on my dayly job for 2 years
now (from the changes file this was around version 0.14) and we didn't
had any greater problem with it in 2 years. There were some smaller
things in the beginning but what do you expect from a 0.14 version. :-)

(e.g. as the versions came out we had to "dump" and recreate the
repository about 3 or 4 times. But currently the binary-format is
declared stable and only a "2.0"-version may(/will) break the current
binary format)




*: In subversion the whole repository is versioned.

The directorys branches/<...> tags/<...> trunk (the "head" version) are
pure convention and you can/could use whatever names you like.
You may even put many software projects into the same repository if you
like that better.


Bis denn

-- 
Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as 
bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer
wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, 
cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.