SVN battle plan? was Re: [development] bzr battle plan
larry at garfieldtech.com
Thu Nov 24 17:26:43 UTC 2005
On Thursday 24 November 2005 07:42 am, Bertrand Mansion wrote:
> In my opinion, Drupal is better using CVS than SVN. With SVN, you get a new
> revision number on every commit. That's fine with compact projects like
> Drupal core. But that's not so fine if commits done to themes, modules, etc
> are done in the same repository. It will make it hard for everyone to
> follow what's going on.
The KDE project passed its 10,000th commit to its SVN repository a few months
after migrating from CVS. So far it's been smooth sailing.
The commit number has no real significance. If anything SVN makes this easier
since commits are project atomic. (You don't commit each file individually;
you commit all your inter-related changes as a single atomic action.)
> This is especially true since I have noticed that a few developers still
> don't understand how to make grouped commits and keep on commiting 100s
> files one at a time... With SVN and this kind of behavior, you get a +100
> revision number on the main repository.
> So unless you create one repository per module, theme, projects, you are
> safer using CVS.
There are, I think, valid arguments to do that anyway, regardless of the SCM
in use, but keeping the commit count number low is not one of them.
Larry Garfield AIM: LOLG42
larry at garfieldtech.com ICQ: 6817012
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of
exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea,
which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to
himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession
of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it." -- Thomas
More information about the development