Source Code Control
in [Embedded]
|
From: Grant Edwards on 9 Nov 2006 10:07 On 2006-11-09, David Kelly <n4hhe(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > In article <12l2p4fjevr47b(a)corp.supernews.com>, > Grant Edwards <grante(a)visi.com> wrote: > >> This bit is particularly ominous: >> >> The most common reasons for data corruption are: >> >> * General network problems, for example, an unreliable >> remote connection causing Visual SourceSafe to drop >> communication midway through a file check-in. >> >> That's just un-f*#@king-believable. > > Why do you find that unbelievable? Is this the first time you > have used (or considered using) a Microsoft product? :-( Yes, pretty much. VSS is the only Microsoft product I've ever used much -- and that was almost entirely via the SourceOffsite client under Linux. I'm a lucky guy. > To Microsoft's credit the above is also considered a flaw in > CVS which SVN has dealt with. SVN intends to be a better CVS > than CVS, not just a different solution for the sake of being > different (and incompatible). True. CVS was just a better RCS, but SVN was clearly designed from the ground up with a lot thought and hindsight. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! This is my WILLIAM at BENDIX memorial CORNER visi.com where I worship William Bendix like a GOD!!
From: toby on 9 Nov 2006 10:31 Johan Josefsson wrote: > There is one annoying thing with SVN. There is AFAIK no way to tell > that your version of a file is the same as the version that is > labelled. If you're talking about the source of a copy, then not directly with the CLI (as far as I know). Other Subversion addons do provide this capability, for example FishEye; here's an example: https://www.telegraphics.com.au/fisheye/browse/tifflibplugin/trunk/Makefile In the changelog for this file, you'll see that each tagging point is listed. OTOH if you are looking at the copy created by tagging, you can directly inspect its log, or ask for a diff between trunk and the tag, etc. > In ClearCase or CVS, I can immediately see that my file (i.e. version) > has a label (tag) attached to it. In SVN, I cannot do that. At least > not from the command line. > > Am I right or have I missed something? Does anybody know?
From: Darin Johnson on 9 Nov 2006 15:07 David Kelly wrote: > To Microsoft's credit the above is also considered a flaw in CVS which > SVN has dealt with. SVN intends to be a better CVS than CVS, not just a > different solution for the sake of being different (and incompatible). One difference is that CVS started out life as just wrappers around the RCS commands. Both RCS and early CVS had no client/server model, and was intended to be used on local files directly; sometimes with networked file systems. Visual Source Safe on the other hand, was introduced at a time when source code control systems were much more advanced and people were more experienced using them. (I have heard that Microsoft never used VSS much internally) -- Darin Johnson
From: Andy Peters on 9 Nov 2006 19:17 toby wrote: > Another OS X client I recently heard about: http://zigzig.com/ Zigversion is still based on Subversion 1.3 ... they need to support 1.4 but aren't there yet. -a
From: Andy Sinclair on 10 Nov 2006 03:47
toby wrote: >I've been using Subversion for a few years. The pluses: >- easy to learn/admin/use >- supported by many client tools/plugins on all platforms >- very reliable >- powerful CLI >- atomic commits (incl renaming), unlike CVS >- convenient protocols (e.g. http/https) >- smoothly supports distributed development >- very easy to integrate with and extend (issue trackers, repository >browsers, etc) > Another vote for subversion here. I have just finished migrating our source code to Subversion from Code Co-op and would heartily recommend it. We use TortoiseSVN and Subclipse to interface to the repository. Andy |