Hi Richard,
On 16.07.05, Richard Smith wrote: [snip]
Can't argue with that. My biggest beef with svn is the way the repository is versioned. Its not suited well for mutiple unrelated projects. My eval of svn was centered around my professional work as an embedded developer and software manager. Where our CVS repo has dozens of different projects all in seperate modules.
Now unless I totally missed something with svn if I wan't to maintain a seperate version number for each of those projects I have to have seperate repositorys. Setting up a repo requires admin access. So I have to either give admin access to my other developers or they have me do it when they want a new module. (Or I guess I could make some sort of automated web) . But its just a pain.
You're right, it's really not nice if revision numbers are shared between different projects. And in addition, besides adding some administrative overhead when you always have to setup a new repository for every new project this iss also not optimal if you want to share things like hooks between different projects.
Darcs has been allmost a drop in CVS replacement and overall really fits in with the way my developer team likes to work. In fact better than CVS did. No central repository is really nice.
I agree that systems without central repository may have advantages in certain cases. One just has to look at the tremendously successful use of such a system in the case of the Linux kernel development.
I'm sure svn will work great for pyTone though and I look forward to learning a bit more about its use "in the wild"
Let's see how it works out - it's certainly better than having no version-control system at all ;-)
Jörg