On 2/2/06, Hugh Sasse <email@example.com> wrote:
> OK, then may I suggest someone explains in the answer why/how they
> are dissimilar? It would give those who don't mind about that
> distinction some choice. [My present position is I'm trying to
> setup a repository in such a way that facilitates access to as many
> in our research group as possible. I'd tend to advocate using the
> shell, and though I don't know how TSVN integrates into the shell
You're kidding, right?
You can only start TSVN by right-clicking on a file/folder in the
shell. You can't start it from the programs list at all. That's shell
Also, it shows you the status of files/folders as overlays in the shell.
> yet, would probably consider it an advantage. But I can't impose my
> interface choices on others, and people have asked about GUI
> access.] RapidSVN may be sufficient for their needs. Explaining
> what it lacks may spur on the RapidSVN developers as well as
> educating TSVN newbies about effective usage. It might also
> illuminate what is considered to be in the scope of "similarity" for
> this question, as other tools appear.
If you're looking for other Subversion UI clients (not necessarily
ones similar to TSVN), you will find a big list on the Subversion
project page. No need for us to duplicate that list.
And please don't expect us to tell you which client has which
advantage over an other one. All (ok, most) clients are always under
heavy development, and such a comparison wouldn't be accurate for more
than a few weeks. Also, such comparisons are always biased towards one
or another. You have to do some work on your own, at least trying out
the clients to see which one is the best for you. We can't do that for
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Thu Feb 2 14:04:56 2006