Re: Subversion in 2010

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com> wrote:

> So maybe a way to approach this is to ask:
>
> For those for whom Subversion is currently the best solution, what
> *else* do they need it to do?

From users I have heard from the two main themes would be:

1) Performance

2) Handling of move/renames

Of course there are always other issues like server-based
configuration etc. but these seem to be the consistently mentioned
themes. And I call them themes because both of these manifest in a
lot of different ways and need improvements in many areas across the
product.

It is probably worth noting that Git, and probably all of the DVCS
options, are particularly strong in these two areas. I suspect if we
could make significant improvements in these areas we would remove the
desire of a lot of people to migrate away from SVN. I still believe
the number of users that want or need the distributed workflow model
is a small minority, especially in the corporate world.

I also think as a community we need to do a better job evangelizing
the strengths of SVN against the DVCS tools, in addition to addressing
the areas where we are weaker and can make improvements.

BTW, I do not think Mike was suggesting we try to be a compelling
replacement for DVCS. I assumed that was a semi-joke or was at least
meant to make the point that we as a community need to decide what we
want to be. Perhaps more importantly what do we want to be that we
are also committed to implementing.

-- 
Thanks
Mark Phippard
http://markphip.blogspot.com/