Re: Subversion

[S I]

Rahul

Thank you for your feedback.  I'm definitely vying for CVS myself, however, 
couple of subversive folks in our company have just heard the hype and 
hoopla about Subversion and trying to sway my vote too.  I read the user 
reviews at the bottom of Subversion homepage and they were not good overall. 
 So I'm very hesitant now, especially that you mention server stability 
issues with Subversion.  Not to mention Subversion is only @ version 1. If I 
ever switch, I'd rather wait it out couple of versions.

Speaking of versions, when is CVS going to give us major features like 
Clearcase, Perforce, or Subversions: Directory versioning, renaming, etc?

Thanks.

----Original Message Follows----
From: "Rahul" <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Subversion
Date: 18 Jul 2005 12:40:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by mc9-f22.hotmail.com with 
Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:43:52 -0700
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)by lists.gnu.org 
with esmtp (Exim 4.43)id 1DubYo-0005oz-2Efor address@hidden; Mon, 18 Jul 
2005 15:45:54 -0400
X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFdmvxFQMGoPBXXj2SEi34ue+6yLAJmc2U=
Path: 
shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: gnu.cvs.help
Followup-To: gnu.cvs.help
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 26
References: <address@hidden>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.160.228.194
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1121715645 7768 127.0.0.1 (18 Jul 2005 
19:40:45GMT)
X-Complaints-To: address@hidden
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 19:40:45 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
Complaints-To: address@hidden
Injection-Info: g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; 
posting-host=67.160.228.194;posting-account=kmVp-w0AAAC1bOHtjbScQrAMpQ3PN4hg
Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.cvs.help:45698
X-BeenThere: address@hidden
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Announcements and discussions for the CVS version control 
system<info-cvs.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: 
<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs>,<mailto:address@hidden>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/info-cvs>
List-Post: <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Help: <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Subscribe: 
<http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs>,<mailto:address@hidden>
Errors-To: address@hidden
Return-Path: address@hidden
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2005 19:43:53.0199 (UTC) 
FILETIME=[0702FFF0:01C58BD1]

Hi Steve -

We our in the course of producing a Subversion Replicator just like our
CVS Replicator. Talking with Subversion admins and users we do come
across one issue regularly   - transaction deadlocks - with Berkeley db
backend.

Some admins routinely restart the Subversion server when they encounter
it. Most of the time that is enough to fix the issue. Seems to us that
they need to work out the stability part more.

There is dependence of Berkeley db if you want any transactional
support. File system backend will not provide you that. You can search
for issues with Berkeley db. On SMP boxes issues with deadlocks and
concurrency control have been around for a while. SVN with Bdb backend
inherits all that.

Also these days most IDEs (Eclipse, WebSphere, Ideaj etc) have CVS
support built-in. There are far more 3rd party tools and plug-ins for
CVS just by it being there longer.

Regards,
Rahul Bhargava
CTO, WANdisco,
http://www.wandisco.com/cvs

_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs