pasobchi.blogg.se - Remove visualsvn

Suppose you have a versioned folder named foo with a file named bar.

The negative side effect of this can be seen in this simple scenario: The fact that the new file is a copy is the reason you get support for the previous history. Subversion implements a move/rename as a copy followed by a delete. So what are the features that Subversion does not provide? For starters, you might want to take a look at issue # 898 in the Subversion issue tracker. If these are the sort of features you are after, then Subversion provides them very well. Likewise, if I want to get a copy of what a file looked like last year, I can do so without needing to know what the file was named last year. If I rename a file, commit it and then examine its history, I can see the history of the file all the way back to when it was created, across any move boundaries. The support for move/rename in Subversion is really about maintaining history. The support for move/rename in Subversion is often not what user's expect it to be. However, I'd also say that even more people mention wanting improved support for move/rename as the big reason for switching.

Support for tracking move/renamed files and folders.Īnyone that has ever been burned by the lack of atomic transactions in CVS knows the value of having that feature, and I'd argue the presence of that feature alone justifies the transition to Subversion.

I see two primary features in Subversion that are mentioned when people want to switch: Usually this happens when their hosting provider adds Subversion support, as the Eclipse Foundation recently did: # 131096. I have read a lot of mailing list threads the last couple years where projects debate whether to move from CVS to Subversion.