Re: CVS migration to subversion?
- From: James Henstridge <james daa com au>
- To: Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>
- Cc: Peter Williams <peter newton cx>, gnome-hackers <gnome-hackers gnome org>
- Subject: Re: CVS migration to subversion?
- Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:23:15 +0800
Bill Haneman wrote:
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 03:06, James Henstridge wrote:
... They made the decision that
network bandwidth was more precious than diskspace, which is probably
correct.
This is interesting since most of the magic forecasting graphs I've seen
in the past few years still show bandwidth growing faster than disk
capacity and CPU.
It is more a case of disks being big enough now. When CVS was being
developped, storing two copies of the source locally in order to be able
to perform local diffs didn't seem like an acceptable tradeoff.
However, these days I can buy a 120GB hard disk for a reasonable price,
so I don't have much of a problem storing two copies of the source.
However, I could always do with a faster network connection :) The
second local copy of the sources gives you the ability to revert to
pristine, perform a diff to last repository version and a few other
operations locally (ie. disconnected mode). It also can reduce the size
of transfers when doing checkins, which could be useful if the bandwidth
of the repository is the limiting factor.
Of course, due to SVN's current limitations it isn't really worth
considering a switch yet (but probably will be worth considering at some
point in the future).
James.
--
Email: james daa com au
WWW: http://www.daa.com.au/~james/
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]