[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion in 2010

From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer_at_yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:40:08 -0800 (PST)

----- Original Message ----

> From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer_at_yahoo.com>
> To: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
> Cc: Karl Fogel <kfogel_at_red-bean.com>; Mark Mielke <mark_at_mark.mielke.cc>; Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>; Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>; Subversion Dev <dev_at_subversion.apache.org>
> Sent: Mon, January 18, 2010 3:51:48 PM
> Subject: Re: Subversion in 2010
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>
> > From: C. Michael Pilato
> > To: Joe Schaefer
> > Cc: Karl Fogel ; Mark Mielke ; Hyrum
> K. Wright ; Mark Phippard ;
> Subversion Dev
> > Sent: Mon, January 18, 2010 3:41:19 PM
> > Subject: Re: Subversion in 2010
> >
> > For the sake of those that don't know, Joe is a member of the Apache
> > Infrastructure team, where it becomes partly his responsibility to influence
> > and support decisions about such things as which version control systems are
> > available to projects hosted at Apache.
> >
> > I don't get the sense that he's merely speaking as someone interested in
> > mouthing off opinions about version control systems. He's looking to ensure
> > that Apache projects get the best VC offering possible. Today, that's
> > Subversion, and Joe appears interested in helping us maintain that position
> > by making Subversion even better with intent (rather than merely adhoc
> > noodling and Darwinistic improvements).
> >
> > (Sorry, Joe, if I've mischaracterized you, your role, or your intent here.)
>
> That's a fair characterization, as I have been a fan of this project for a long
> time now, and have contributed a few patches when I could figure out what was
> required. My take on why we use Subversion at Apache is because it's a good
> fit, both socially and technically, for how we want our projects to do
> development.
> But that's something that I am called on to defend from time to time, on more
> internal lists, because Apache is a member-driven organization. The membership
> wants nothing but the best for Apache, and the members who have switched to
> other
> version control tools have lots of positive things to say about their
> experiences.
> Often times I feel like I'm in the position of saying "subversion will be able
> to do that too at some point", but I can't say for sure when. It's an
> explanation
> that doesn't generate a feeling of satisfaction amongst the membership, as you
> might imagine.

Let me apologise if this and my other recent comments about subversion came across
as too negative, that's par for the course for a sysadmin. As far as I am concerned
Apache's deployment of subversion is nothing short of a smashing success, and the
number one issue the Apache Infrastructure Team continues to deal with is in keeping
up with svn demand. Traffic nearly doubles for us every year or so; it's rather
amazing that the servers continue to cope with it all. Congrats to the svn team
for such a stable and well-constructed product, and may that legacy continue.

      
Received on 2010-01-18 22:40:53 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.