Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Why we might use subversion instead of arch.

[Charles Duffy]

On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 13:41, Pierce T.Wetter III wrote:
>    Perhaps the issue was that I don't quite understand how branches work 
> vs. archives. I thought people were always making archives, but now I'm 
> starting to think that isn't so true, its just that branches look 
> similar to making a new archive?

An archive is a place where you keep branches (where a "branch" is...
ahh, I almost want to use the "line of development" phrase) a
category/branch/version combination. Typically folks have fairly few
archives, often just one, and store a number of different development
lines within that archive.

In a commercial environment, it makes sense to have just one official
central archive, and at least one archive per developer where that
developer can store their private branches, work-in-progress items, and
the like.

So no, I wouldn't exactly say that people are always making archives.
(There's also the practice of regular archive rotation, but it's really
more an optional practice than a necessary one).