On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:07:22AM -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> Just this last weekend, some developers I spoke with said, "we aren't
> moving because it isn't 1.0". I hear that *all* the time. But the fact of
> the matter is that SVN is more than ready for users, but they don't
> believe me when I tell them that. And it is all because of that stupid
> label called a version number.
>
I am not using svn at work because it isn't 1.0.
This isn't because I don't trust it, don't think it's ready, or don't think
it doesn't kick the crap out of the VCS system we're using now.
It's not even because of the date parser. :-)
It's for one simple reason: compatibility. When I ask my team to download
svn and subclipse and rapidsvn and tortoisesvn and svnup and so on, I only
want them to have to do it once. There have been so many times that I've
wanted to switch, but the moving target of the API has prevented me.
Each time we break the bindings I congratulate myself for my restraint.
If one was interested in svn for its features, probably 0.15 or so would
have been good enough. If one was interested in svn for its stability,
probably 0.25 or so would have been good enough. If one was interested
in svn for its speed (I wasn't; my repos are comparatively small), probably
0.33 or so would have been good enough.
What else is left, IMO? Compatibility. That's all I'm waiting for.
You're right; there are hoardes of people waiting for 1.0 to adopt svn.
I'm one of them. The cost of an API change is probably proportional
to the number of users; let's try to injure only the early adopters,
rather than the masses.
--ben
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Jan 7 17:00:36 2004