From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Switching to Subversion Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:53:08 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87ac2w45e0.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87y7qg2pbj.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87mz6w2odt.fsf@catnip.gol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1163437226 17674 80.91.229.2 (13 Nov 2006 17:00:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 17:00:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 13 18:00:21 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GjfAM-00052B-U0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:00:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GjfAM-0002jk-DV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 12:00:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gjf9t-0002c7-UR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:59:45 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Gjf9r-0002aG-1R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:59:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gjf9q-0002aA-Mm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:59:42 -0500 Original-Received: from [64.233.166.181] (helo=py-out-1112.google.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1Gjf9q-0000Vo-JL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:59:42 -0500 Original-Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id p76so767824pyb for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:59:41 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NL3Nkwf7p483XxEWyTAKnKQ/gDUBTM7wqjmd4/99STyc4RvsiFj4lpHboKE4o3q/8UpKugWRJ8znTcrC2k4rni8/ICm03fJEiScD7aOX19wYfgLn9nhYwCg80pQrfeke3+vMn0TVpZ4rKAJYFOLFgrZD70tNqNr7k+6QC7ojdKI= Original-Received: by 10.35.115.18 with SMTP id s18mr10830213pym.1163436788669; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:53:08 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.35.95.18 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Nov 2006 08:53:08 -0800 (PST) Original-To: "Stefan Monnier" In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:62228 Archived-At: On 11/13/06, Stefan Monnier wrote: > Basically Subversion's been UI-driven, with fundamental > features retrofitted afterwards. That is a design methodology which > doesn't always result in the cleanest and most robust result. In my opinion (and I'm just a lurker on Subversion), that's not entirely true. On one hand, yes, it was a bit UI-driven because its stated goal was to be "a better CVS". But on the other hand, some things are just the result of decisions that seemed good at the time: for example, not having true renames, or using branches for tagging. > - Subversion has had more hours (and manhours) devoted to it than the sum of > its competitors, yet it still lacks the most commonly needed tool > (besides what CVS already offers): merge support. Doing it right is hard, and probably couldn't be really made in a back-compatible way. I'd expect that for 2.0. And, to be fair, that time has been spent in other ways: alternative backends, three repository access methods, WebDAV/DeltaV, good bindings for third-party tools (look at SVK :), localization, *excellent* documentation, and it is generally rock-solid. As I've said several times, what SVN has is much more maturity; that's where the manhours have been spent. > - Subversion is a big and heavy piece of software, which I'm not very eager > to have to rely on. Well, I prefer that to requiring Python or Perl or Haskell (which I love) or whatnot. And certainly SCMs whose interface is made of scripts don't strike me as very serious (call me prejudiced). > So I'd rather use Arch, DaRCS, Mercurial, GIT, you name it. I don't have anything against other tools, of course, if they have native implementations in Windows and the interface is reasonably fast (assuming the underlying design is sound :) /L/e/k/t/u