Kean Johnston wrote:
>> I'm really sorry that I can't go into more detail or have a discussion
>> on it right now:-(
>
> No worries I have a lot of pressure too :) We need a new SCM. CVS doesnt
> do it, BitKeeper, while a great tool, is out of the running becuase
> trivial operations result in a full tree clone (a problem with something
> the size of UnixWare or OpenServer), so I am currently re-evaluating SVN
> and am looking at Perforce as well. Last time I looked the text-base
> penalty was what drove me away from svn but from my relatively casual
> glances over mail topics I think that has been addressed to the point I
> dont see it as an issue any longer.
Umm, the text base is exactly the same as it was the last time you asked
about it on this list, IIRC. It's still not optional, and won't be
until after 1.0 at the very least. I don't want to keep you from
pursuing the SQL backend, since it seems like a useful project, but if
the text base thing is a dealbreaker for you, I figured it'd be better
to let you know now than have you find out later.
-garrett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Fri Oct 3 01:05:57 2003