Over the past year I have been using SVN for both personal projects, and a
couple of smaller scale projects at the company I work for. I'm convinced on
multiple levels that SVN is superior to CVS in a number of respects, and
that it would be a good fit for my company, which currently uses CVS.
I have been given the opportunity to sell SVN to upper management. I have
done my homework with regards to what some of the capabilities of SVN are,
the technical infrastructure required to support it, and the client and
server side stability of the project overall. Additionally, as I mentioned
earlier, I have been using it for about a year.
However, I can't yet claim to be an expert SVN user. I haven't yet used it
in a project that had more than two developers. I know that SVN is being
used on a much larger scale by many OSS projects -- projects I have deep
respect for. Particularly I'm a bit uncertain about what the "gotchas" or
wrinkles are with using SVN in a more branch intensive project. Yes -- I
have read through the red bean book a few times, and gone over the branching
section multiple times. I did enough branching/merging in CVS to feel I can
claim I'm not a novice in this area.
So my request is two fold:
(1) Links, white papers, or analysis that others have done with regards to
CVS vs SVN. Even better if some of this information plays devils advocate as
to why SVN would be a bad choice.
(2) Commentary, anecdotes, etc about your experience with medium sized
projects (10-20 developers) and branching.
Thanks in advance...
PS This is in no way meant to stir a flame war against CVS -- I've used it
for years and appreciate the efforts of all those that have worked on it.
Received on Wed Jan 10 17:37:19 2007