[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ruby-talk
Subject:    Re: Why SVN?
From:       "Trans" <transfire () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-03-12 22:18:13
Message-ID: 1173737732.995783.165770 () n33g2000cwc ! googlegroups ! com
[Download RAW message or body]



On Mar 12, 3:46 pm, "Tanner Burson" <tanner.bur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/12/07, Glen Holcomb <damnbig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Why not SVN?
>
> This is going a bit OT for ruby-talk, but I'll bite.

To be clear I'm asking why _rubyists_ in particluar choose one over
the other --not so off topic.

> I work from several different machines, in several different locations,
> including from a laptop that is often disconnected from the internet.  It's
> extremely useful for me to be able to record changes, branch, work, in my
> normal manner, without worrying about the fact that when I DO get a
> connection all my changes will show up as one big lump.  So I use Darcs over
> SSH.  It gives me a full, functional repository with "commits" as I need
> them, without being connected.  Then when I get back to civilization I can
> push all my changes back to my main repo and be good to go, SVN can't give
> me that kind of work flow, so I've moved away from it.  (I'm aware of SVK,
> but never could get it working well on linux/mac/and windows)
>
> At work, where I work from a single workstation, always connected to the
> network, I use SVN, because it fits the environment better.  Use the tool
> that fits the job, and move on.

So you actually use both. I hate the lack of DRY in that, but it looks
like I may have to go down that road too.

Thanks,
T.


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]