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

´ð¸´: Re: ´ð¸´: Re: ´ð¸´: Re: ´ð¸´: Re: A performance issue

From: Ö첪ºÀ <bohao_at_sunnorth.com.cn>
Date: 2007-11-20 12:23:19 CET

Hi Ivan,

Yes, that's why our company decided to convert CVS to SVN. The situation
is we have
 already moved to SVN and we are trying to make it perfect to proof that
SVN
 is much more better than CVS (don't tell me that we don't need to proof
because
 managers care numbers more than tech.). But obviously some user have the
complaint
and I must explain the reason to them even those problems are meaningless.
I believe that's why I put this issue on the mailing list.

Thanks for your replying! :)

Best regards!

Sincerely,
Alex Zhu

Quality Engineering Department III
Sunnorth Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.
Tel: +86-10-62981668 Ext. 2792 (Office) / 2056 (3G Lab)
Fax: +86-10-62985972
Email: bohao@sunnorth.com.cn


Ivan Cenov <i_cenov@botevgrad.com> дÓÚ 2007-11-20 17:09:46:

> Ö첪ºÀ §ß§Ñ§á§Ú§ã§Ñ:
>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> I knew that. So this is the key point that svn is slower than cvs?
>
> Thanks!

> Hi,
> As a user of SVN in our company and sometimes user of CVS for
> an project on internet, I could say that SVN is more sophisticated than
> CVS, and it has much more possibilites for controlling the projects.
> The time that is 'lost' for slower checkouts is meaningless than the
time
> saved because of the better project handling in SVN. I don't think that
the
> main action when working on a project is 'checkout-ing'.
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Ivan Cenov
> OKTO-7 Co., Botevgrad, Bulgaria
> i_cenov@botevgrad.com, imc@okto7.com
> GSM: +359 888 76 10 80
> phone: +359 723 6 61 20, +359 723 6 61 61
> fax: +359 723 6 62 62

Received on Tue Nov 20 12:43:41 2007

This is an archived mail posted to the TortoiseSVN Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.