Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Pieter Lenaerts <pieter.lenaerts AT telenet.be>
  • To: "sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org" <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] SVN as p4 replacement
  • Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:27:31 +0100

Op wo, 15-03-2006 te 23:42 +0100, schreef Andrew "ruskie" Levstik:
> > 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 complains that file is out of date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...

this is what you get with any system with a central repo.

if you use distributed with a central repo, you got two options, either
you send patches, which will then be integrated or you push changes up.

if you send patches, you don't have the same repository anymore as the
central one, so you'd have to clone/branch/... it every time == a lot of
traffic.

if you push changes up, you'll need to get the changesets from other
devs before you can push yours up or changeset order will be disrupted,
resulting in diverging repos. not sure if there's a scm that allows to
push changes up and afterwards pulling down missing changesets,
submitted after your last pull but before your current push.

>
> 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...

let's hear it :)

> 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.

you can force any decentralized model to the centralized side, simply by
all synching to the same repo.

>
> Just my input on this...
>
--
Pieter Lenaerts
Sportstraat 27
9000 Gent

tel. +32485189222





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page