cvs vs svn... (Re: SOURCES: ghostscript-afpl-am.patch (NEW), ghostscript-afpl-ijs_pkg...)

Jan Rekorajski baggins at sith.mimuw.edu.pl
Thu Sep 8 01:53:25 CEST 2005


On Wed, 07 Sep 2005, wrobell wrote:

> On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 11:03 +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote:
> > Example: http://svn.pld-linux.org/svn/rc-scripts
> > I want to keep only trunk, branches and _some_ tags, tell me how to do
> > it, and how to prevent svn up from getting all tags.
> 
> svn up trunk?
> svn up tags/tagireallywant?
> 
> come on...

Ok, that's solved then, thanks. One more question - how to do 'svn up' in
directory where I did checkouts so it will update all checked subdirs?
With cvs all I need to do is `mkdir CVS ; echo $CVSROOT > CVS/Root ; cvs up`
A recipe for svn much appreciated :)

> > And the royal PITA, which svn is, is not worth it.
> 
> ... it is really hard to discuss with such arguments, which seem
> to be matter of taste.
> 
> i think (let's skip svn for now), we need:
> - to keep history of tags and branches

ok, I guess all versioning systems must have it, or do you mean
dead/deleted tags and branches? What for?

> - atomic commit (so we can commit patches and specs with one move
>   and revert it easily later if there is a need)

Example?

> - ability to rename specs and patches without pain and loosing
>   information and _without_administrator_ help

Maybe, but do we really do this that often?

> - check changes without making connection to remote server

And svn solves it how?

> these are my problems with cvs. svn solves them. 
> 
> svn gives us some advantages. disadvantages? any real, which makes life
> really painful? let's talk but without "royal PITA", "i do not care
> for lost information", "i do not care for renaming", etc. please.

One BIG disadvantege is that we will have to reorganize the entire repo
into "one package" = "one svn dir" layout. And then it's either a
fscking lot of copying svn-local-repo <-> ~/rpm/* or constant editing of
~/.rpmmacros. With current layout I can just checkout entire SPECS and
SOURCES and work with any package on any branch easily.

And then, what "lost information"? And the argument about renaming is
just making me laugh, we have more than 9400 specs, we needed to rename
how much of them? 10? 20? Come on.

> then, if svn is not solution for us, then what other alternatives
> we can use? let's think about it, because cvs is not solution
> for us.

Why it is not? I work with it from the beggining and I don't feel any
need to switch, I haven't yet seen a versioning system that would give
enough advantages that I'd consider switching.

Janek
-- 
Jan Rękorajski            |  ALL SUSPECTS ARE GUILTY. PERIOD!
baggins<at>mimuw.edu.pl   |  OTHERWISE THEY WOULDN'T BE SUSPECTS, WOULD THEY?
BOFH, MANIAC              |                   -- TROOPS by Kevin Rubio



More information about the pld-devel-en mailing list