Anoq of the Sun
Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:48:52 +0200
Stephen Weeks wrote:
>>I have been using SVN for some time on my own (small) projects and
>>the experience has been positive.
> I've been using SVN for the last 4-5 months on a largish project and
> have been quite happy.
I have also been using it at work for almost 1 year on a project
with 3-7 developers - and it has really been a bliss :-)
And with the latest 1.2.1 version supporting file-locking, things should be
perfect (we used some temporary version 1.1.1 patch to have locking support).
>>For me, the killer features of SVN are:
>>[0. similarity to CVS; SVN is easy to learn,]
>> 1. the ability to do (among other things) status queries and diffs
>> while not connected, and
and add/remove files for the next commit, while not having server access...
>> 2. ability to move files and directories.
> I second these. The speed from using local pristine copies is also
> nice. Finally, I've found the integrated log useful -- no need to
> maintain a separate "commitlog".
Yes, that too... And:
*) commits are atomic operations! :-)
Adam Goode wrote:
> There are also problems importing from a repository where branches and
> tags are used inconsistently. But it seems that if you've never used the
> same name for both a branch and a tag, you're ok.
SVN defaults to treating all files as binary (i.e. no CR/LF conversion and
no keyword substitution). You can enable CR/LF conversion etc. as properties
per file and you can set some administrative settings to have e.g. certain file
extensions use e.g. CR/LR conversion (and/or keyword substitution) by default.
I would even install SVN at home, if it wasn't because compilation fails on
my precious Debian 2.2 system because of some "atexit" incompatibility with
libc or libtool (whichever causes the problem).
http://www.anoq.net/music/ - creative instrumental electronic music