geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@coredevelopers.net>
Subject Re: SVN on MacOS X (was: geronimo-dev Digest 15 Aug 2003 02:16:34 -0000 Issue 64)
Date Fri, 15 Aug 2003 07:38:12 GMT
Last I check the fink (or was it the binary apt-get) svn package was 
not being maintained :-(

--jason


On Friday, August 15, 2003, at 01:38  PM, Greg Stein wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 02:16:34AM -0000, 
> geronimo-dev-digest-help@incubator.apache.org wrote:
>> ...
>> From: Alex Blewitt <Alex.Blewitt@ioshq.com>
>> Subject: Re: SVN functionality (was: geronimo-dev Digest 14 Aug 2003 
>> 22:49:29 -0000 Issue 62)
>> To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 01:24:17 +0100
>>
>> On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 01:17 Europe/London, Greg Stein wrote:
>> ...
>> Yes, there will no doubt be differences. Here's how I see the main 
>> one:
>>
>> Not supported on the OS that I use to develop all my code versus an
>> ability to move code from one place in the repository to another.
>
> WHAT?! Subversion is fully supported on MacOS X. A number of the SVN
> developers' primary platform is MacOS (e.g. Justin Erenkrantz).
>
> And from what Noel was saying, it seems that it may be that all you 
> need to
> do is to build svnup on your platform, and it will work within Eclipse.
>
> Subversion is built using the Apache Portable Runtime (APR), meaning 
> it runs
> everywhere the Apache web server does. That is a *lot* of platforms.
>
>> Sorry, but I don't really care how the server works -- I need the
>> client to work :-)
>
> The command line client absolutely works on your platform. It has for 
> a long
> time. And it sounds like subclipse might, if you simply build the 
> sucker.
>
>> ...
>> Yeah, these are all nice things but the only thing (IMHO) that makes
>> SVN stand out better than CVS is the move. And you can do it in CVS;
>> you just move the ,v file from one directory to another.
>
> Um. Moving the ,v file is the worst thing you could do. That totally 
> breaks
> checking out older versions (by tag or by date).
>
>> ...
>>> The suggestion that "lack of Eclipse" integration is enough to *not*
>>> consider SVN seems rather short-sighted. It seems like you aren't
>>> considering the other side of the equation. What do you *get* by
>>> switching?
>>
>> The ability to not develop code on my machine? A small space saving on
>> the server? Log messages from when the code was very old?
>
> You're off the deep end here. SVN works fine on MacOS X.
>
>> ...
>>> Of course, I'm biased :-), but I also think the discussion needs to
>>> think
>>> about more items than simply Eclipse integration.
>>
>> There aren't a whole lot of other decent tools available for free on
>> Mac OS X. Cutting a small-but-non-negligible user-base out of
>> development to save bytes on the server isn't a good tradeoff IMHO.
>
> It isn't about saving bytes. It is about tracking the history of the
> project. 'svn copy' is also just as important as moves. And the atomic
> commits. And...
>
> But your premise about "cutting out..." doesn't hold. Again, SVN works 
> just
> hunky dory on MacOS X. No MacOS developers would be cut out.
>
>>>> SVN clients may exist, but there's no way I'd want to use a source
>>>> management tool outside of Eclipse ...
>>>
>>> "CVS might be integrated with Eclipse, but there's no way I'd want to
>>> use a
>>> source management tool that doesn't support move/copy."
>>
>> If you're not administering the server, I'm not sure you'd see much
>> difference. If you are administering the server, then yes, there's
>> probably something to say for the upgrade.
>
> Hunh? I'm not sure that I follow this. Are you referring back to your 
> "save
> a few bytes" comment?
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> -- 
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
>


Mime
View raw message