Re: A couple more subversion notes

["Giovanni Bajo" <rasky at develer dot com>]

Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu> wrote:

>     Sorry about that, but let's not remember of the other dozens which
>     works on branches and can do a merge in seconds instead of literally
>     *hours*, and so on.
>
> Yes, but how often do even those who work on branches a lot do merges?


Less often than needed or wanted, because it takes way too much time to do
one, instead of few seconds as it should. One may want to merge a
development branch every day or so, but it can't be done right now because
the overhead of the operation is too high. This causes people to batch
merges in big drops, which increase the conflicts and the time to solve
those (when something does not work, you have to investigate a larger
timespan to find out what broken what, and you have to do that without even
seeing atomic changesets in logs).

> If not very often, why not just start it up, background it, and go to
sleep?

Notice that large merge commits on branches lock the whole CVS repository
for everybody for long time.
-- 
Giovanni Bajo