Kean Johnston wrote:
>>>cheap, and lets face it, the vast majority of developers are likely
>>>to be connected to a LAN, not a WAN.
>>
>>That may be true for ClearCase and other commercial RCSs, but it is
>>definitely not true for Subversion, which intends to replace
>>CVS in the
>>open source world. I think you're in the minority here.
>
> Not sure how the intention to replace cvs in any way proves that most
> developers likely to use SVN will be wan connected, not lan connected.
Almost all open source projects have many developers who are not
geographically close. They function over the Internet. Overwhelmingly
CVS is used in this way, and given Subversion's goals, it would be
unreasonable to assume it won't be used in the same way.
>>The pristine text base is a real advantage for me. Even though my
>
> Then by all means feel free to use it. What I proposed in no way hampers
> your current usage. But by only having one way of doing things it
> DOES hamper my usage.
I'd argue that the multiple ways does hamper my usage. To repeat what
Greg Hudson said, the more complex code is more difficult to maintain
and test, slowing other new features more important to me and causing
regressions.
I'm having trouble seeing the "double the disk space" as a significant
problem. Are you in an environment in which you develop over the LAN but
the extra disk space is a significant expense? Do you know of people who
are? It sounds to me like this is a hypothetical situation, not one
you've actually encountered. You've also said disk prices are higher in
other countries...do you have a figure?
Same with the inode problem. What system doesn't have enough inodes for
your working copy? Does what Greg Hudson mentioned (going from 4*file
extra inodes to 2*file extra inodes) solve the problem?
Thanks,
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Dec 17 02:36:00 2002