Subversion? (Re: HEADS UP: Importing csup into base)

[Nik Clayton]

Ollivier Robert wrote:
> According to Peter Wemm:
>> Like perforce, it is fully client/server, but it has some considerable 
>> advantages over perforce:
>>
>> 1) It has fairly good detached operation modes.  You can do logs, diffs, 
>> reverts, etc while detached.  It does this by keeping metadata and a 
>> small number of revisions cached locally.
> 
> In my opinion, it is not enough.  You can't svn commit on a detached mode.
> You can't work as if you were connected, commit several csets, go back one
> and so on.  That's too limiting.

And when you need that, you use svk, which others have pointed out. 
Given a hypothetical FreeBSD Subversion repository you could choose to 
use either the Subversion project tools (which have that limitation that 
you need network access to the repo to commit) or you use svk, which 
lets you commit locally, and then propogate ("svk push") your locally 
committed changes back to the FreeBSD repo.

>> The comments about svn's lack of branch merge memory make me a bit 
>> nervous though.  We've had brahcnes that have been incrementally merged 
>> hundreds of times under perforce, and the lack of remembering which 
>> revisions have and have not been merged would be sorely missed.
> 
> Yes.

Fixed with svk.  Fixed with contrib/svnmerge in Subversion.

N