[SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement

Andrew "ruskie" Levstik ruskie at mages.ath.cx
Wed Mar 15 17:42:50 EST 2006


Pieter Lenaerts wrote :

> gpg: Signature made sre 15 mar 2006 23:31:16 CET using DSA key ID CD17BE16
> gpg: Good signature from "Pieter Lenaerts (personal e-mail)
> <pieter.lenaerts at telenet.be>"
> gpg:                 aka "Pieter Lenaerts (linux e-mail) <e-type at cwazy.co.uk>"
> gpg:                 aka "Pieter Lenaerts (university e-mail)
> <pieter.lenaerts at ua.ac.be>"
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: C0AC CFE2 882A 9474 D1D7  FC2A E64F 177D CD17 BE16
> 
> 
> Op wo, 15-03-2006 te 19:05 +0100, schreef Arwed von Merkatz:
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 06:46:25PM +0100, Pieter Lenaerts wrote:
> > > edit devel
> > > $ svn commit
> > > $ svn merge -r committed:head devel/section/spell test/section/spell
> > > $ svn commit
> > > 
> > > and done :)
> > 
> > This is _one_ merge, now how does this work if several other gurus now
> > edit the spell in devel, then I want to integrate that new version to
> > test?
> 
> assuming multiple developers edit the same file at the same time, but at
> different lines (WC = working copy)
> 
> WC1: svn update
> WC2: svn update
> WC1: edit devel
> WC2: edit devel
> WC1: svn commit
> WC2: svn commit -> complains that file is out of date
> WC2: svn update -> assuming no overlap, so this merges fine
> WC2: svn commit
> WC3: svn update -> this gives commits from 1 and 2 in WC3
> WC3: svn merge -r committed:head devel/section/spell test/section/spell
> WC3: svn commit
> done :)
> 
> if a line is concurrently edited by multiple developers there will of
> course be a conflict.
> 

Erm that sounds HORRIBLE...

Anyway I'm basiraly in favour of svk...
I'm using it myself though not on anything as complex as our grimoires and
I haven't tried any merges as of yet...

I think sandalle was trying something...

As for stability it so far hasn't crashed for me nor caused any
other general side effects...

I like svk mostly for two reasons...

It's remarkably perforce like to use and
It supports both a centralized and a decentralized model.

Just my input on this...

-- 
Andrew "ruskie" Levstik
Source Mage GNU/Linux Games grimoire guru
Geek/Hacker/Tinker

Hacker FAQ: http://www.plethora.net/%7eseebs/faqs/hacker.html

Key id = A7A9E461
Key fingerprint = 757E C16B F5B7 DC27 B003  CCED CF95 3A77 A7A9 E461




More information about the SM-Discuss mailing list