# Why SVN? **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [March 12, 2007, 8:26pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576 "2007-03-12T20:26:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2007, 7:27am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/41 "2007-03-15T07:27:18Z")
On 14 Mar 2007, at 20:46, Austin Z. wrote: [snip] > Distributed systems fit very few development models. > [snip] Not true in my experience. Every place I’ve worked in the last couple of years has had to deal with developers that don’t always have online access to the repo, or are in locations where connectivity sucks so badly to their home location that it might as well not exist. In fact every place I’ve every worked ever has had those problems - its just that we only had solutions recently 🙂 Don’t get my wrong. I love Subversion. My home repo has been running it for years and I’m in the process of moving $work over to it. But I’ve been using SVK to as my primary client to access those repositories for ages - and I wouldn’t want to go back to not being able to commit on the train 🙂 Cheers, Adrian ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2007, 8:27am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/42 "2007-03-15T08:27:23Z")
On Mar 14, 9:07 pm, “Austin Z.” [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > People say that distributed systems have cheap branching, but I find > that very hard to believe, since (at least in the ones that I’ve > tried, and I have a hard time imagining how others would differ) the > branches are physical copies in a different location. That’s cheap for > the making, yes, but your total storage cost goes up (since none of > the advantages of having a single repository can be found) and it then > becomes possible to _lose_ branches from your repository (cf fragility > above). I have actually given that some thought. While not the case presently, I think eventually this will become a mute point. Ultimately file systems themselves will manage data redundancy. I think of it as “holographic” memory. I don’t know why exactly as it has nothing much to do with actual holographs, but it sounds cool 😉 For fun I started writing a version control system in Ruby just to get a better understanding of the concepts. Turns out not to be so hard really --at least for a simple model. In any case, as far your advice. I’m taking it, but with Matz’ twist. My two main projects consist of many subprojects. I figure I can use Subversion on the project as a whole, but Git on each subproject. Well that’s the theory. Let you know how it goes. T. ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2007, 9:18am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/43 "2007-03-15T09:18:29Z")
On Thu, Mar 15, 2007 at 04:26:52PM +0900, Trans wrote: > > becomes possible to _lose_ branches from your repository (cf fragility > > above). > > I have actually given that some thought. While not the case presently, > I think eventually this will become a mute point. Ultimately file > systems themselves will manage data redundancy. I think of it as > “holographic” memory. I don’t know why exactly as it has nothing much > to do with actual holographs, but it sounds cool 😉 The term “holographic”, in reference to data storage and similar subjects, refers to a three dimensional indexing system. The term “holographic memory” is already in use, generally involving next-generation storage technologies that involve high density data storage indexed three-dimensionally in photopolymers or crystalline structures. While I’m waxing pedantic, I may as well point out that the word you wanted was probably “moot”, not “mute”. ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2007, 7:37pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/44 "2007-03-15T19:37:11Z")
On 3/15/07, Trans [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > I think eventually this will become a mute point. Ultimately file > systems themselves will manage data redundancy. I think of it as > “holographic” memory. I don’t know why exactly as it has nothing much > to do with actual holographs, but it sounds cool 😉 As someone who works in the storage and backup industry, it will not be a moot point. > For fun I started writing a version control system in Ruby just to get > a better understanding of the concepts. Turns out not to be so hard > really --at least for a simple model. That’s actually what people think; it isn’t, in fact, as simple as people think it is once you start scaling. Git works for Linux because it fits that specific development model. Other systems generally have to be more flexible. -austin ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2007, 2:59pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/45 "2007-03-15T14:59:20Z")
On Mar 15, 4:17 am, Chad P. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > becomes possible to _lose_ branches from your repository (cf fragility > > > “holographic memory” is already in use, generally involving > > > next-generation storage technologies that involve high density data > > > storage indexed three-dimensionally in photopolymers or crystalline > > > structures. Thanks. I’m aware. I’m using the term loosely, basically based on concepts drawn from the book “The Holographic Universe” --the idea that something thing can be in two different places at the same time. I also view the the human brain something like holographic storage using a form of reference and signal interference. In any case, I take your point. I’m sure a better name already exists --I just don’t know what it is. > While I’m waxing pedantic, I may as well point out that the word you > wanted was probably “moot”, not “mute”. Yep. I make that silly mistake all the time. But I’m a fan of Mark Twain for more than one reason. T. ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 12:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/46 "2007-03-19T00:03:31Z")
On Mar 18, 2007, at 5:45 PM, Thomas H. wrote: > Developer A is working on a major task. He has already changed a lot > of software locally. Now A gets aware that he needs B doing some > modifications in some other modules where B is the real expert. > Neither A nor B can propagate his own changes solely, because that > would break the build for all other developers. This is a normal > branch situation, but the branch situation has been recognized very > late. In addition A and B have to work some more time on the common > task, which means that they have to interchange and synchronize their > software releases several times without disturbing the others. I’m just learning SVN, but can’t this problem be handled as follows: - Create a branch in the repository - Developer A uses svn switch to associate their local files with the new branch - Developer A commits their changes to the branch - Developer B checks out the branch I’m not trying to make any point re: distributed vs centralized repositories I’m just trying to determine if I understand how this might be handled in SVN. Gary W. ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2007, 10:45pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/47 "2007-03-18T22:45:23Z")
“Tim B.” [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote/schrieb [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid): > working offline is, with the exception of maybe a short stint on a > plane or train, not that common nowadays. Working offline is not the only situation where a distributed version control system may be better. How about the following situation. Developer A is working on a major task. He has already changed a lot of software locally. Now A gets aware that he needs B doing some modifications in some other modules where B is the real expert. Neither A nor B can propagate his own changes solely, because that would break the build for all other developers. This is a normal branch situation, but the branch situation has been recognized very late. In addition A and B have to work some more time on the common task, which means that they have to interchange and synchronize their software releases several times without disturbing the others. In a distributed system A and B just pull from each other as often as they need to get the task done. Full propagation (resp. integration, in a central system) will follow then, but not earlier. Regards Thomas ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 1:20am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/48 "2007-03-19T01:20:37Z")
Gary W. wrote: > - Developer A uses svn switch to associate their local files > with the new branch > - Developer A commits their changes to the branch > - Developer B checks out the branch If I understand the presented scenario correctly then you are absolutely correct. ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 2:19pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/49 "2007-03-19T14:19:44Z")
On 3/19/07, Robert D. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > > So I’m wondering, what’s so special about SVN as opposed to the other > > > > people such absolutes. So please, enlighten me. > > So consider twice putting him into your kill file. > > And yes of course Austin you have the right to holler at me, I was > quite harsh… I know very well who he is. I don’t really care who he is if he makes a large and absolute claim w/o backing it up. No special cases for contributors either. I don’t think the acts are mutually exclusive. This is one of the most beautiful things about the Ruby community. The fact that some people even question Matz sometimes about his thoughts and proposals is a sign of good health. No blind worship to be found here please. Now given that, I wasn’t about to kill-file him. I don’t mind just archiving or deleting email I don’t like. Kill-filing seems to be a bit far for most cases (Ilias might have pushed that line though 😉 ). He did an excellent job replying to my original concerns and made his claim fair. While I didn’t really agree with what he would do in my cases, I found it much more logical once he put his position into the picture. It rather enriched the conversation in my opinion but w/o that, it really put a dull spin on things leaving a void of an answer just sitting there. A lot of people have my respect and thanks. Austin is one of them. I will still try to play a fair game here still. Holler at me and call me a troll if I don’t. Thanks, Brian. ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 11:13am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/50 "2007-03-19T11:13:29Z")
On 3/14/07, Brian M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > choices? Is it because SVN is more like CVS than the other choices? > > > Distributed systems fit very few development models. > > Brian. Austin a TROLL??? Well maybe he has adopted a troll like language but I believe that you should see the context of all his contributions. I defend him because I dislike him a lot and I find his Unix hatery quite boring. BUT he is a very valuable contributor. So consider twice putting him into your kill file. And yes of course Austin you have the right to holler at me, I was quite harsh… ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 2:33pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/51 "2007-03-19T14:33:50Z")
On 3/19/07, Brian M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > > don’t transfer there. > > > > I think it is only fair that you share why if you plan on telling > > > > BUT he is a very valuable contributor. > > > > fact that some people even question Matz sometimes about his thoughts > > > > it much more logical once he put his position into the picture. It > > > > rather enriched the conversation in my opinion but w/o that, it really > > > > put a dull spin on things leaving a void of an answer just sitting > > > > there. > > A lot of people have my respect and thanks. Austin is one of them. I > will still try to play a fair game here still. Holler at me and call > me a troll if I don’t. Why would I do that? It is rather me who is wrong, I actually thought that you are a newbie, what a memory I have, and I thought it might be a good occasion to say what I think and warn someone not to lose vital information. So I just made a fool out of myself, great. I can only apologize for the misjudgment of the situation… I do that quite often though lately ☹ > Thanks, > Brian. Robert ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 3:49pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/52 "2007-03-19T15:49:26Z")
On 3/12/07, Trans [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Solid Darcs Faster > Popular Stronger > Supported Better > > Not that Darcs hasn’t been good to me. > > 🙂 T. I would agree with a picture like that 🙂 I mostly only check out projects, and recently I saw some that switched to git. From the checkout/compile point of view git is pretty much the same as cvs. But once I had to make a modification it became different. In the end I found working with the modifications easier and cleaner. However, I would be very disappointed if I found myself on Windows and could not use git because of that. The possibility of working offline is important for people who have experience with crappy net coverage. I would count myself in, but I understand that in some places such issues are nonexistent. It looks like the distributed systems are new and more powerful which means people have to get used to it. And many probably never will. Also some features like crossplatform support have to be ironed out. So I would guess the only reason to use them right now would be experimenting or some features that are not easily obtained elsewhere. Thanks Michal ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 9:58pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/53 "2007-03-19T21:58:21Z")
On 3/19/07, Austin Z. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > I’m not sure what you’re reading, Robert, but in no way am I a Unix > \* removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Fisrt of all thx for replying in this cool way I appreciate. Sorry Austin if I do not read your mails carefully enough, I will try to change this. But I was pushed by the rather err aggressive wording of yours to come to that conclusion. If that conclusion was jumped you did very well to tell me nicely as you are very credible in this way. I freely admit that there is an OS that I hate, maybe I should shout that out loudly even if it is politically incorrect instead of compensating by believing that others hate Linux/Unix. In the end it is me who behaved trollish here, kind of some old untold frustration about somebody hollering at my beloved Linux/GNU/Cygwin. I really appreciate the way you were handling this… Best regards Robert ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 4:43pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/54 "2007-03-19T16:43:26Z")
On 3/19/07, Robert D. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Austin a TROLL??? Well maybe he has adopted a troll like language but > I believe that you should see the context of all his contributions. > > I defend him because I dislike him a lot and I find his Unix hatery > quite boring. > BUT he is a very valuable contributor. Hatery? I’m not sure what you’re reading, Robert, but in no way am I a Unix hater. At work, I’m now running Ubuntu as my primary desktop (with Windows as a VM) and have switched to OS X at home. I develop professionally for Linux, AIX, Solaris, and HP-UX – and Windows. What I refuse to do is to accept Unix-only solutions for things, because that’s just chauvinism that has no place in Ruby, IMO. -austin ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2007, 10:24pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/55 "2007-03-19T22:24:28Z")
On 3/19/07, Austin Z. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > I’m not sure what you’re reading, Robert, but in no way am I a Unix > hater. At work, I’m now running Ubuntu as my primary desktop (with > Windows as a VM) and have switched to OS X at home. I develop > professionally for Linux, AIX, Solaris, and HP-UX – and Windows. What > I refuse to do is to accept Unix-only solutions for things, because > that’s just chauvinism that has no place in Ruby, IMO. Yes, port to such alien environment like WIndows is the litmus test of portability 🙂 As one should not accept solutions that “work for the 90% of users” (on Windows only), one should not accept solutions that exclude about half of the users (the Windows users). Thanks Michal ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2007, 10:30am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/56 "2007-03-21T10:30:26Z")
> Professionally, I use subversion, though my team is looking to migrate > to something that does a better job at branch management and merging. I have been thinking a lot about this too; the rule about not checking in broken code seems to mitigate some of the agility that I’d like to have. If I make progress and check in a branch, then I can delete what I damn please in my further attempts to get it working. I will always have those revisions to start from if it turns out my deleting was too hasty. If I keep it local until it’s passing tests, I don’t have that (but I can often approximate it by commenting lines out). I plan to do a lot of branching for this reason. I have noticed, though, that it is done somewhat sparingly in many of the repos I’ve seen. Perhaps this is primarily related to project maturity, software type, community circumstances. But I wonder if open source would be that much more agile if the casual branching I described was more common. It could be a bit like putting heads together to get it working, begging feedback and brainstorm at more steps along the way, rather than waiting until the code works to check in. Conversely, if branching and merging is difficult enough that this luxury would rather slow down the team, does the issue seem like one that can be addressed in a future release, or is it an unavoidable consequence of svn’s other features? Mostly rhetorical here. Last thing. svn has a new sync feature. Does this make it [more] usable as a distributed repo? -Mike [-just got hired through [workingwithrails.com](http://workingwithrails.com); extremely humbled to join the ranks of professional rubyists!] ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2007, 4:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/57 "2007-03-21T16:30:46Z")
On 21 mar, 10:49, Adrian H. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > You might want to consider using SVK as your client (if you’re happy > using the command line). It’s a distributed system built on top of > subversion - so you can mirror subversion repos locally and push/pull > changes between your local copy and the main one. > > I’ve been using it for about a year as my primary way of talking to > subversion and have been very happy with it. Adrian, I’d love to hear more about your workflow. Could you give an example of how you use this set-up for things like branching and merging? Cheers, Greg ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2007, 10:50am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/58 "2007-03-21T10:50:47Z")
On 21 Mar 2007, at 09:30, Mike S. wrote: > have those revisions to start from if it turns out my deleting was too > hasty. If I keep it local until it’s passing tests, I don’t have that > (but I can often approximate it by commenting lines out). > [snip] You might want to consider using SVK as your client (if you’re happy using the command line). It’s a distributed system built on top of subversion - so you can mirror subversion repos locally and push/pull changes between your local copy and the main one. I’ve been using it for about a year as my primary way of talking to subversion and have been very happy with it. Cheers, Adrian ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2007, 4:53pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/59 "2007-03-21T16:53:48Z")
On 21 Mar 2007, at 15:30, Greg H. wrote: > Adrian, I’d love to hear more about your workflow. Could you give an > example of how you use this set-up for things like branching and > merging? Assuming $R is my “master” subversion repository I do something like this 1. At the start of a project set up a mirror… 2. … and a local branch 3. Check out a working copy into the foo directory 4. Pull changes down from the central server I can then merrily work away in my local foo working copy committing to my local branch on my local machine. When I want to push my changes back to the central server I do ``` svk push --verbatim foo ``` (The --verbatim bit reproduces the commits you made to the local repo on the remote one, rather than merging them into one big commit. Makes it easier to track changes) That’s basically it. Cheers, Adrian ---
**Author:** ![Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/dfb087/32.png) [@Trans](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Trans)\ **Post date:** [April 3, 2007, 4:59am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576/60 "2007-04-03T04:59:12Z")
On Monday 12 March 2007 10:51 pm, Brian M. wrote: > things up to date. Of course, that isn’t to say that avoiding merge > work always works either. > > With all of this talk about SVN vs. anything not CVS, I would love to > see some ideas of how one could apply an svn interface to an existing > distributed tool. Some get close but maybe someone should make a > centralized “porcelain” for git? I don’t see any reason you couldn’t > implement a good portion of behaviors people seem to like. I’m just catching up on some old email (so my comment may be far off the mark (or out of date)), but you (anybody 😉 might want to look into svk (try googling for it). I haven’t tried it, but it was recommended to me as sort of a front end that would let me: - use svn type commands - maintain a local and remote repository (i.e., distributed) - and the remote repository could be a variety of things, including CVS, SVN, Darcs, and …? Randy K. [Previous page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576.md?page=2) [Next page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/why-svn/88576.md?page=4)