Nicholas Bastin wrote: > It's a mature product. I would hope that that would count for > something. I've had enough corrupted subversion repositories that I'm > not crazy about the thought of using it in a production system. I > know I'm not the only person with this experience.
compared to Perforce, SVN is extremely fragile. I've used both for years, and I've never had Perforce repository break down on me. our SVN repositories are relatively stable these days, but the clients are still buggy as hell (mostly along the "I don't feel like doing this today, despite the fact that it worked yesterday, and I don't feel like telling you what's wrong either" lines. having to nuke workspaces from time to time gets boring, quickly.) in contrast, Perforce just runs and runs and runs. the clients always do what you tell them. and server maintenance is trivial; just make sure that the server starts when the host computer boots, and if you have enough disk, just leave it running. if you're tight on disk space, trim away some log files now and then. that's it. but despite this, if all you need is a better CVS, I'd say SVN is good enough for today's python-dev. I'd still think that a more distributed, mail-driven system (built on top of Mercurial, Bazaar-NG, or some such (*)) would speed up both development and patch processing, and also make it a lot easier for "casual contributors" and "drive-by developers" to help develop Python, but that's another story. </F> *) being able to ship a fully working Python-powered SCM with the Python source code would be an extra coolness bonus, of course. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com