On Monday 29 December 2003 22:14, Folker Schamel wrote:
> Glen wrote:
> > Question 2 - Is about clients. Can I use a client built for say version
> > 0.31.1 with a server that is 0.35.1 if I am using http:// access (i.e. I
> > am NOT using file:// access). I say this because the most recent
> > version of the eclipse plugin for subversion is currently linked against
> > 0.31.1
> I don't know about 0.31.1 with 0.35.1,
> but generally we had major troubles when mixing server/client versions
> (hangs during updates; costed us a lot of time before
> we found out the reason).
> Because of this, we STRICTLY follow the policy to always
> use EXACTLY the same version for server and client.
While under alpha, the Subversion team had a policy that clients within 1
minor rev of the server were guaranteed to work. We will be hitting 1.0 in
the near future, and once that is done this problem will all but go away.
The Subversion team will be very careful about breaking compatibility in the
future. This current policy was only meant to help the development process
while the team was trying to reach a 1.0 release.
> > Question 3 - recommended clients. Should we bite the bullet and use the
> > command line client or are people having success with the eclipse plugin
> > or tortoise clients (those are the two that I have tried). Or is there
> > another non-command line client that is more stable. My primary concern
> > is stability.
> Tortoise has some crashes,
> but the main problem I see is the missing diff functionality.
If you have an external diff tool that you like to use, Tortoise has no
problems calling it. We regularly use Tortoise's diff command to invoke
SlickEdit's DiffZilla program, and it works quite well. IIRC, even without
an external program, Tortoise will show you diffs in unified diff format.
I can't speak much for crashes other than to say that I have half a dozen
developers that use it every day and it's worked fine for us. We've found it
to be reliable and an extremely useful tool.
> > Question 4 - Not really a question more of a request for comments. We
> > have several developer's and reliability and stability are most
> > important (versus having feature X). We are switching to subversion to
> > ease stress not create it ;-) Please share
> > experiences/recommendations.
> See my previos emails for some details.
> All in all, personally I think Subversion with http://
> and command-line frontend itself is very stable and relyable;
> however, I didn't find a client which is ready now.
> (However, because of John's hint I'm currently installing
> the latest Tortoise - let's see!)
Some of our team has been using Subversion for close to a year now in a mixed
environment (some of us are running Linux, some of us are running Windows
2000/XP, and some of us are running all of the above). We've suffered no
data loss, and have found Subversion to be very stable and reliable. We
originally set up the repository on a Windows machine, and later migrated it
to a Linux box, simply because we new how to administer a Linux machine
better. Nearly all of our developers are using it now (about a dozen
people), and as previous users of CVS, we appreciate all of the new features
Subversion has to offer. So much in fact, that I can't resist helping the
team out. :-)
The only hiccup that you might face is if your developing web projects
under .NET. There is a definite issue with the '.svn' directories and IIS,
although the exact problem eludes me at the moment.
Good luck making your decision Glen!
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Tue Dec 30 04:44:27 2003