Re: A couple more subversion notes

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org> writes:

| On Wed, 2005-10-19 at 17:40 +0200, Paolo Carlini wrote:
| > Giovanni Bajo wrote:
| > 
| > >I'll add others:
| > >
| > >I would also notice that most people don't RTFM. I spent many efforts in
| > >writing the Wiki page, and the benefits of SVN are apparent if you spend
| > >some time reading it and studying the thing a little. To make things better,
| > >something *has* to change. You can't expect SVN to be *identical* to CVS,
| > >but it's very very close.
| > >  
| > >
| > Agreed, many thanks both to you and Steven.
| > 
| > Only one request from me: before the switch takes place, can you make
| > sure the instructions on the wiki are sufficiently complete and
| > incorporate all the latest advices about performance and so on? I think
| > this is an high priority and would even suggest delaying the switch if
| > we don't have those docs ready.
| 
| 
| Well i guess i should aks the harsh question, which is, are these
| advantages enough for you guys, or should we just not move?

Frankly, I don't know.

I would like to try first before making a definitive answer.
However, reading this thread, I find the inflation on supporting tools
and trickery requirements a bit  daunting and too high an entry barrier.
If I have to install the lastest version of (system) tool X, Y and Z
-- which sometimes I can't on some of the machines I use for
development -- then I would say the answer is "no".  But, as I
mentioned before, I have to try (probably not before next week).

I'm grateful to those who put effort in documenting the process, but
some of the replies I found here let me with an initial feeling of
deep skepticism. 

| Again, there are invariably some pains associated with any switch in
| workflow :)

Indeed.

-- Gaby