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 manage to create a massively large Subversion repository (~10:1 size increase) when converting a CVS repository that had been pruned of old tags (cvs tag -d). The branches-without-tags confused cvs2svn and caused it to generate very many "unnamed" branches that chewed up a ton of disk space. Excluding those branches where the old tags had been removed fixed this problem. I think the GCC folks and other groups who have very large CVS repositories (multi-gigabyte) have had similar results. -- Caleb Epstein caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com