11 ms·

SVN branches are not expensive. They use a copy-on-write. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.8/svn.branchmerge.using.html#svn.branchmerge.using.create http://sv

SVN branches are not expensive. They use a copy-on-write. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.8/svn.branchmerge.using.html#svn.branchmerge.using.create http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.8/svn.branchmerge.using.htm...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
HelloNurse 8y ago
Good luck using hard links on Windows without accidents. Apart from sarcasm, SVN branches use suffer-on-merge: creating a branch means immediate technical debt of the most useless kind, which is more expensive than any inefficient file copying. From the same manual: "To perform a sync merge, first make sure your working copy of the branch is “clean”—that it has no local modifications reported by svn status." "One special kind of flexibility is the ability to have a working copy containing files and directories with a mix of different working revision numbers. Subversion working copies do not always correspond to any single revision in the repository; they may contain files from several different revisions."
zamalek 8y ago
Every SVN branch costs money, any system that cares about branch ancestry is expensive. If me and Jim are working on two features on the same release and then I find that I need to integrate Jim's work in order to continue mine, Jim will need to merge his [incomplete] work into a common ancestor. If I am working on a feature in a completely different release, this "merge path" gets long and begins to cost money and carry risk. Jim hasn't finished his work yet; before any release can happen, Jim has to finish his work and merge the complete changes to all affected branches. If we can't wait for him to finish, then we're rolling back his changes and, oops, someone rolled back the same change on multiple branches. Now we can't launch a hundred features because there was an interdependency between two.

11 ms·

SVN branches are not expensive. They use a copy-on-write. http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.8/svn.branchmerge.using.html#svn.branchmerge.using.create http://sv

by sourcesmith 8y ago

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
HelloNurse 8y ago
Good luck using hard links on Windows without accidents. Apart from sarcasm, SVN branches use suffer-on-merge: creating a branch means immediate technical debt of the most useless kind, which is more expensive than any inefficient file copying. From the same manual: "To perform a sync merge, first make sure your working copy of the branch is “clean”—that it has no local modifications reported by svn status." "One special kind of flexibility is the ability to have a working copy containing files and directories with a mix of different working revision numbers. Subversion working copies do not always correspond to any single revision in the repository; they may contain files from several different revisions."
zamalek 8y ago
Every SVN branch costs money, any system that cares about branch ancestry is expensive. If me and Jim are working on two features on the same release and then I find that I need to integrate Jim's work in order to continue mine, Jim will need to merge his [incomplete] work into a common ancestor. If I am working on a feature in a completely different release, this "merge path" gets long and begins to cost money and carry risk. Jim hasn't finished his work yet; before any release can happen, Jim has to finish his work and merge the complete changes to all affected branches. If we can't wait for him to finish, then we're rolling back his changes and, oops, someone rolled back the same change on multiple branches. Now we can't launch a hundred features because there was an interdependency between two.