Posted Jan 19, 2009 21:22 UTC (Mon) by henning
In reply to: Subversions Relevance
Parent article: GNOME considers DVCS choices
I don't think that SVN was only a stop gap measure. Its way more better
then CVS, its just works and its easy to use. Git its much more
powerful, but it makes also easier to shot yourself in the foot. If you
want to work with peoples that only develop in their spare time then svn
helps to lower the barrier to participate. And If you need to motivate
other developers to use a RCS effectivly in their daily routine, then you
also don't want to make their life harder then necessary.
And as already noted in the comments, most projects (e.g. inhouse, only a
few developers) don't need a DVCS. I don't consider the projects i work
ATM as backwards, only because "we still use SVN". IMHO the quality of a
project has nothing really to do with the flavour of RCS they use.
SVN 1.0 (released in febr. 2004) was more or less a better CVS. But the
svn developers don't stopped there, 1.5.x has e.g. now a much more
advanced merge tracking, they improved the repository disk layout, added
changeset tagging and much more things.
to post comments)