Caleb Epstein wrote:
On 9/1/05, Jeff Garland <jeff@crystalclearsoftware.com> wrote:
Finally, I'm not sure we addressed all the concerns with subversion. As I
recall there was discussion about large increases in the diskspace required, etc. Personally I think it's the way to go, but I'd think we need to get broader agreement first.
Just a data point in the disk-space argument. I've done some conversions of decent-sized CVS repositories and the Subversion repository did not use that much more disk space than CVS did. It ended up being about 1:1 SVN:CVS ratio in terms of disk space usage, maybe slightly higher but not a lot.
I believe the issue that is being talked about here is the required space for the checked-out tree, not the repository, as subversion keeps a copy of the original files in the source tree to enable more operations being performed offline. Regards, Stefan