|
6
by mbp at sourcefrog
import all docs from arch |
1 |
svk |
2 |
=== |
|
3 |
||
4 |
The strategic strength is that it can trivially and reliably |
|
5 |
interoperate with upstream projects using Subversion. This tends to |
|
6 |
satisfy people who need disconnected operation, and so to allow |
|
7 |
projects to feel safe about switching to Subversion. |
|
8 |
||
|
185
by mbp at sourcefrog
more notes on svk |
9 |
On the other hand it may be a bit flaky in implementation -- when I |
10 |
tried it (dec 04), it crashed in confusing ways several times. And |
|
11 |
certainly Subversion's reputation for reliability is mixed -- some |
|
12 |
people think it's very solid, but I've seen many db crashes at HP. |
|
13 |
||
14 |
Being written in Perl on top of Svn bindings may not inspire |
|
15 |
confidence. robertc says he's worked with the libsvn bindings and |
|
16 |
they're a mess. Relatively little documentation. In general a |
|
17 |
feeling of a very tall stack. |
|
18 |
||
19 |
There is some fluff about defining multiple repositories, which seems |
|
20 |
like an argument for history-in-branch. |
|
21 |
||
22 |
Keeps track of merge arrows to do smart merges. |
|
23 |
||
24 |
They follow Perforce in not having any control files in the tree -- |
|
25 |
nice in some ways but you must use the right tool to move or delete a |
|
26 |
working area. (In fact the whole thing seems to be inspired a bit by |
|
27 |
Perforce?) I think keeping just one dotfile at the top level may be a |
|
28 |
fair compromise. |
|
29 |
||
30 |
||
31 |
||
32 |
(If this is unfair or inaccurate mail me dammit.) |