cvs vs svn...

[Piotr Szymanski]

Hi,
Jan Rekorajski (Thursday 08 of September 2005 23:18):
> You ("svn fans" ;);) say [1] and then you say it's impossible to have
> changelog in files (no $Log$ impleneted in svn). For me it's pointless to
> have [1] functionality without being able to see the logs. So gain from
> [1] is eliminated by the lack of log (I'm not able to know what to diff).
Just some notes from using svn in KDE while working on my google summer of 
code project:

+) The advantage
* the simplicity of svn cp & svn mv, I used the frequently because my project 
went several reorganisations during developing, still its not that often 
used.

-) The disadvantage
100% terrible working with branches, cvs is just much more comfortable, with 
cvs you only need to know the branch name, while in svn you need to know the 
directory you want to do the svn switch, i must say this is the 80% of the 
reasons why didnt backport my changes to HEAD or KDE 3.5 branch, switching 
through branches was just way ineffective.

Give the fact that we work a lot more with branches than we move files around 
its just natural I guess that we stay with cvs. 
-- 
Piotr Szymanski
djurban at pld-linux.org