From the newsgroup postings, this is the one that typically bites people who are switching from CVS. Many people have scripts that do things like 'fetch
We just switched to Subversion from SourceSafe (no snickering please) at our company. It's basically been a good experience, but with the following areas of SVN caused problems: 1) svn:externals. 2) the --non-recursive flag on 'svn update' and 'svn checkout'. 3) berkley-DB repository speed. 1) svn:externals. We used svn:externals to replace SourceSafe's concept of "shared files". However, svn:externals are bad because - commits at the top of a tree that contains externals do not propogate through the externals. So, if you have a large tree, some parts that are externals and some that are not, and you've made changes all over, when you commit you have to remember to visit every single external and then commit there as well. - branching and tagging doesn't do anything special with svn:externals, and you'd want it to. 2) the --non-recursive flag on 'svn update' and 'svn checkout'. the top level, look at it, and then decide what other parts to fetch'. For example, you might fetch the top level of your tree to get a configuration file that tells you what to do next. However, once you've fetched something non-recursively, you can't then change your mind and fetch the rest of the tree recursively. Actually, the problem is much worse than a missing flag on a command line, the --non-recursive flag is completely broken and results in what is essentially a corrupt work area. If you look around at the Subversion postings, there is a bug report against this called ["svn checkout -N" should actually work] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=695 3) berkley-DB repository speed. It's slow to do common operations like fetching new files and getting history. You might want to consider using the new native file format FSFS, as it is faster. We also used TortoiseSVN to replace the SourceSafe explorer. It's very slow, and I've basically stopped using it except for the merge dialog. I can't comment on the dysfunctional merge issue - I've used the merge feature, and I've not lost any work with it yet. Hope this helps. Rob. "Rene Rivera" <grafik.list@redshift-software.com> wrote in message news:4268132D.5050203@redshift-software.com...
Beman Dawes wrote:
Comments?
* Update the wiki with a set of concerns about moving to SVN.
My biggest concern is still the disfunctional merge operation of SVN. In my last contract job a few weeks ago I had it loose a set of changes during a merge :-(
Note.. SourceForge is starting development and testing to offer SVN service.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - Grafik/jabber.org
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost