6 ms·

How to Fail at SVN

12 points by Altreus 16y ago

pquerna 16y ago
4/5 are problems unrelated to SVN. Heck, Git can burn you on all of those. 1/5 is about using svnserve instead of file:// and network mounts, and doesn't need to be a rant, just a don't use file:// protocol for shared repositories. I wish HN had downvotes for an article like this.
- Altreus 16y ago
  Thanks for the sophisticated and helpful response. I'll obviously implement many of the suggestions you made to improve my article writing.
  - nailer 16y ago
    > It's neither reliable nor safe, nor can you easily administrate it. While you're at it, the word you wanted was 'administer'.
- JoachimSchipper 16y ago
  It's more of a "how to fail at version control", yes - but with a Subversion slant (along the lines of "it can work fine, but the default is bad"). I don't see how that makes this a particularly bad article, though.
yoyar 16y ago
I hate using Windows too.
DanHulton 16y ago
Pffft. Complaining about TortoiseSVN? Use SmartSVN - it works in all 3 OSes, too. I know, I've had to use it in all 3 and it's nice to have that consistancy.
rix0r 16y ago
I'm guessing that you've never had to use svn+ssh:// with a group of developers. The file permissions hell you get into using that with multiple users is very frustrating. I much prefer the http:// http:// access method, and have never had a locking problem.
sapphirecat 16y ago
> By default in SVN, everyone is committing to the same - and indeed the master, de-facto, controlling, always perfect - branch. Trunk. It's worse than that; svn asks you to maintain the trunk/tags/branches directory structure yourself, rather than including them as core concepts in the VCS itself(1). So, someone can commit an update to something under tags/ and svn won't even give out a warning, since it has no idea that tags/* are supposed to be write-once. 1) Looks like they added `svn branch`, sometime after the 1.4.x version I'm actually using.
dasil003 16y ago
Every time I read something about SVN I just thank god I don't have to use it anymore. Just the thought of a merge-heavy workflow in svn gives me the willies.

12 points by Altreus 16y ago

4/5 are problems unrelated to SVN. Heck, Git can burn you on all of those. 1/5 is about using svnserve instead of file:// and network mounts, and doesn't need to be a rant, just a don't use file:// protocol for shared repositories. I wish HN had downvotes for an article like this.

Altreus 16y ago
Thanks for the sophisticated and helpful response. I'll obviously implement many of the suggestions you made to improve my article writing.
- nailer 16y ago
  > It's neither reliable nor safe, nor can you easily administrate it. While you're at it, the word you wanted was 'administer'.
JoachimSchipper 16y ago
It's more of a "how to fail at version control", yes - but with a Subversion slant (along the lines of "it can work fine, but the default is bad"). I don't see how that makes this a particularly bad article, though.

yoyar 16y ago

I hate using Windows too.

DanHulton 16y ago

Pffft. Complaining about TortoiseSVN? Use SmartSVN - it works in all 3 OSes, too. I know, I've had to use it in all 3 and it's nice to have that consistancy.

rix0r 16y ago

I'm guessing that you've never had to use svn+ssh:// with a group of developers. The file permissions hell you get into using that with multiple users is very frustrating. I much prefer the http:// http:// access method, and have never had a locking problem.

sapphirecat 16y ago

> By default in SVN, everyone is committing to the same - and indeed the master, de-facto, controlling, always perfect - branch. Trunk. It's worse than that; svn asks you to maintain the trunk/tags/branches directory structure yourself, rather than including them as core concepts in the VCS itself(1). So, someone can commit an update to something under tags/ and svn won't even give out a warning, since it has no idea that tags/* are supposed to be write-once. 1) Looks like they added `svn branch`, sometime after the 1.4.x version I'm actually using.

dasil003 16y ago

Every time I read something about SVN I just thank god I don't have to use it anymore. Just the thought of a merge-heavy workflow in svn gives me the willies.