[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question

From: David Brown
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] arch/subversion comparison question
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 13:17:37 -0800
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Thu, Mar 04, 2004 at 08:11:06AM -0500, Neal D. Becker wrote:

> I was reading subversion doc, and one thing really caught my attention.  It
> says that svn doesn't keep track of which patches are already applied, and
> applying a patch more than once would cause problems.
> I believe arch doesn't suffer from this defect?  Is this correct?  To my
> thinking, that's pretty significant.

You are correct, and yes, it is fairly significant.  To their credit,
the subversion team does list this as something to do, but they don't
seem to put very much priority on it.

It is kind of a mentality when the tools define the process.  CVS does
branches _extermely_ poorly.  Developers are have mostly used CVS tend
to not think in terms of branches.  As such, they don't think
implementing them is all that important.

For me, personally, when I was back evaluating systems, this was a
complete show stopper for SVN.

Dave Brown

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]