> Subversion fails on two counts: Subversion fails on 3 counts (for those keeping track, its so long I forgot one):
> - it isn't ACID (I'm told that's the correct DB term) > In subversion parallel pushes are magically merged, maybe. For > instance: developer #1's deletes a .h macro and developer #2 adds a .c > use. ACID guarantees that #1 XOR #2 wins, and the other gets to sort > out the mess. > > - it doesn't have true branches > Instead it has conventions; lots of conventions; and based on > experience, projects end up discovering that developers have been > following all of them - it doesn't work offline After all, you're always online; so what is the problem? Well no, and there's no good technical reason for imposing the requirement. > Oh, and I now forget how many years it is since GCC, a relatively > small project, has being trying to migrate away from subversion.