I've found that users require some training regarding the .svn/ directories.
I recently added subversion to an existing project, and some users freaked
out at the sudden appearance of these directories in their source code. I've
still got one user who refuses to work in a directory with a .svn/
subdirectory in it. (He's an older fellow, who is convinced that subversion
will scramble his code. No amount of reassurance has any effect. So he does
his work in a non-working-copy directory, and then he has to copy any files
he modified into the actual working copy directory, so they can be checked
in. This, of course, overwrites any changes anyone else made... *grumble*)
My point is that if subversion didn't appear so invasive (meaning that the
source tree is untouched, not having .svn/ directories appear in it), and
that if it made backup copies of pre-merged files, adoptation by the timid
and insecure would tend to be easier. Oh, and get it out of beta mode, too.
Oh, and while you're at it, give it a GUI for Windows users, along with an
integrated MP3 player, registry editor, text editor, JAVA IDE, ... And port
it to the Palm OS. ;)
--- Eric
> On a slightly different note: Besides the v1.0 release
> arguments, I'm curious to know if anybody out there actually
> prefers having built-in .svn/ directories, and if so, in which
> scenario they might need them.
>
> Kumaran
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 25 19:32:25 2003