Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Subversion 1.6 released.

subversion.tigris.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 28 posts

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#11

Post by trapper »

axod wrote: post #9
jrockway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subversion... the version control system of choice for people that don't understand version control.

Please feel free to educate us. I use version control and have done for years. I don't branch or merge, and svn works brilliantly for me. It stays completely out the way and allows me to rollback, see changesets, logs, etc if I need. If I wrote a version control system based on my own use case, it'd end up pretty much like svn. What am I missing? I've read all the "Git is AWESOME " posts. If I switched to git, it wou…

But, but it's cool to love git!

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#12

Post by jrockway »

axod wrote: post #9
jrockway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subversion... the version control system of choice for people that don't understand version control.

Please feel free to educate us. I use version control and have done for years. I don't branch or merge, and svn works brilliantly for me. It stays completely out the way and allows me to rollback, see changesets, logs, etc if I need. If I wrote a version control system based on my own use case, it'd end up pretty much like svn. What am I missing? I've read all the "Git is AWESOME " posts. If I switched to git, it wou…

How do you un-"svn update" after you don't like its auto-merge?

(Unless you never use svn update, you do branch and merge. You just don't have any control over how it works.)

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#13

Post by DTrejo »

st3fan wrote: post #7
sgharms wrote: post #6

While many responses are going to be "yawn", especially in the face of the git juggernaut, a great many enterprise systems are locked into svn for the foreseeable future (given economic forecasts, IT departments aren't getting tons of budget for SCM migration / upgrade). Therefore a few extra features coming in are welcome...even if they don't begin with git-

great many enterprise systems - oh please give me a break. Subversion has nothing to do with enterprise blah. Many of us simply use svn because it is a fine tool and gets the job done. For all kinds of projects, from open source to 'enterprise'. Seriously .. don't put the enterprisey stigma on it. It does not deserve that.

He did not put the "enterprisey stigma" on it. He only talked about how some enterprises are locked in, and appreciate updates. It appears you misread something.

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#14

Post by seanb »

axod wrote: post #9
jrockway wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Subversion... the version control system of choice for people that don't understand version control.

Please feel free to educate us. I use version control and have done for years. I don't branch or merge, and svn works brilliantly for me. It stays completely out the way and allows me to rollback, see changesets, logs, etc if I need. If I wrote a version control system based on my own use case, it'd end up pretty much like svn. What am I missing? I've read all the "Git is AWESOME " posts. If I switched to git, it wou…

I mostly agree, but have been using git almost exclusively lately. The big draw for me is the ability to (easily) commit locally (and roll back those commits if I mess something up), then push commits to the "master" repository selectively. If SVN allowed for a similar workflow, it would satisfy my needs just fine.

Of course, any distributed VCS would probably fit that description... I found mercurial to be nice as well, and I used it happily for a couple projects. The primary reason for switching to git was to become familiar with another tool.

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#15

Post by jhawk28 »

I wonder if the CTypes Python bindings will help out the DVCS clients such as Bazaar or Mercurial. Bazaar already has good client support for SVN. It would be nice if Mercurial would get first class support.

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#17

Post by ankhmoop »

jrockway wrote: post #12
axod wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please feel free to educate us. I use version control and have done for years. I don't branch or merge, and svn works brilliantly for me. It stays completely out the way and allows me to rollback, see changesets, logs, etc if I need. If I wrote a version control system based on my own use case, it'd end up pretty much like svn. What am I missing? I've read all the "Git is AWESOME " posts. If I switched to git, it wou…

How do you un-"svn update" after you don't like its auto-merge? (Unless you never use svn update, you do branch and merge. You just don't have any control over how it works.)

Two developers working on the same files at the same time is a suboptimal arrangement, and should it arise, actual communication outside of the VCS is necessary.

Git automates patchset management, not merging of rapidly diverging branches of the -same- code. With or without git, independent developers working on a set of patches for the same code will introduce genuine implementation conflicts that can not be merged without independent communication.

If, however, you should find yourself in this remarkably inefficient situation (ie, a commit war over simultaneously modified files), I recommend:

1) Speak to the other developer.

2) svn diff >saved.diff && svn up OR tar -cf ../svn.bak.tar . && svn up

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#18

Post by axod »

jrockway wrote: post #12
axod wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please feel free to educate us. I use version control and have done for years. I don't branch or merge, and svn works brilliantly for me. It stays completely out the way and allows me to rollback, see changesets, logs, etc if I need. If I wrote a version control system based on my own use case, it'd end up pretty much like svn. What am I missing? I've read all the "Git is AWESOME " posts. If I switched to git, it wou…

How do you un-"svn update" after you don't like its auto-merge? (Unless you never use svn update, you do branch and merge. You just don't have any control over how it works.)

I've never needed to do that. The auto-merge has never failed for me.

Give me an example of when you "wouldn't like its auto-merge".

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#19

Post by axod »

seanb wrote: post #14
axod wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please feel free to educate us. I use version control and have done for years. I don't branch or merge, and svn works brilliantly for me. It stays completely out the way and allows me to rollback, see changesets, logs, etc if I need. If I wrote a version control system based on my own use case, it'd end up pretty much like svn. What am I missing? I've read all the "Git is AWESOME " posts. If I switched to git, it wou…

I mostly agree, but have been using git almost exclusively lately. The big draw for me is the ability to (easily) commit locally (and roll back those commits if I mess something up), then push commits to the "master" repository selectively. If SVN allowed for a similar workflow, it would satisfy my needs just fine. Of course, any distributed VCS would probably fit that description... I found mercurial to be nice as w…

Just install a local svn repository :/

Re: Subversion 1.6 released.

#20

Post by visitor4rmindia »

vinutheraj wrote: post #10

Here's a scenario - there are 2 coders working on basically the same base code, but each doing something different. Now the code from both these guys needs to be merged to the base code periodically, so what do you think these guys should use - git or svn , or any other VCS for that matter ?

I suppose any good VCS should work fine. Each dev should get his/her own branch which is periodically merged upstream.

We use SVN and it does the job just fine. In fact, we are still stuck on 1.4 so we track merges ourselves which isn't really a big deal.

Post reply on HN