Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Arthur Barrett wrote: > As far as I am concerned the page is extremely even handed. Many > "features" of SVN in my opinion actively encourage poor Configuration > Management and make SVN a poor basis for SCM. You'd have to be more specific about the features you object to before anyone is going to take your comments seriously. Don't make the mistake of disparaging another project without providing reams of supporting details. The website comparison is also not current with the current 1.3.0 release; among the features now available are locking, ACL's, (hooks have always been available), etc. > Finally, the SVN comparison page is not designed to reach "open source > advocates". It is designed to reach commercial software developers and > CM/Quality managers who are reviewing different CM systems, and who may > have received some disinformation about CVSNT. But you have to be sure not to promote disinformation on your own behalf (which is what Bryce is complaining about). In particular, CVSNT's "true rename" support is very fragile (it renames it only in the client and _only_ on _that_ client)! I wound up renaming the file in the repository and updating all clients the last time I tried it. On the other hand, the fact that *today* Subversion supports rename via delete/add-with-history and it works just fine, has nothing to do with the fact this is an acknowledged limitation that they intend to change. I can easily come up with a comparison of Subversion to CVSNT which highlight SVN's strengths and CVSNT's weaknesses. It won't be any more objective than what is currently on March-Hare's website. Let's not let this devolve into "my tool is better" when both tools have useful niches that they can serve. John