I am using fsvs and just found svnhome in google...

[Juliano F. Ravasi]

martin f krafft wrote:
> If you are fine with the slow speed and all the other limitations
> of Subversion, give it a shot. I haven't, and I wouldn't touch it
> because I don't trust Subversion.

Gratuitous Subversion bashing?

May I ask why you don't "trust" Subversion?

> Also, since Subversion can't
> actually operate in offline mode, you either need to be connected to
> use the filesystem, or you only get a local repository that you
> cannot sync with another machine, which kinda defeats the whole
> point for me.

What? Are you sure you meant that? You can't use the filesystem if you
are not connected?

If your intention is to sync between machines, you NEED to have a
connection. What other means of syncing do you expect without a network
connection?

You could have said "offline commits" as a possible advantage, but that
is not syncing. Once you need to pull or push, you need a connection, no
matter if you use CVCS or DVCS. And in my particular POV, offline commit
is a wonderful feature when you do SCM, but for homedir versioning it
has very little use (of course, people are free to disagree with me...
*I* find it very useless for this purpose).

When I started planning about creating my vcs-home, the only resources
available were Joey's and Scott's articles about Subversion. I did try
myself some of the other options (svk, git and hg), and Subversion ended
being the only sane option (with some help from SVK if/when/where
distribution is needed). In fact, I already knew that git and hg would
fail for the task, since I already knew them very well for SCM before
starting my vcs-home experiments.

During my tests, most DVCSes had deficiencies that outweighed their
benefits for this task. I could list here all the problems, but they all
summarize to that virtually all of them were designed to manage source
code projects (only files and not directories are important, no need to
support unicode filenames, most files are very small, etc). That is
valid to the extent that git and hg developers advise you to not use
them for anything other than SCM. Subversion, on the other hand, is
completely agnostic about what you put in there.

To make things clear, I'm not a proponent of this or that VCS. I have
some extra experience with Subversion, sure, and I recognize its
limitations (and also its strong points). I'm just able to analyze
clearly when some tool is more suited than some other tool for this or
that task, without having my opinion influenced by some famous guy who
makes a presentation calling everyone who disagrees with him "ugly and
stupid".

Regards,

-- 
Juliano F. Ravasi ·· http://juliano.info/
5105 46CC B2B7 F0CD 5F47 E740 72CA 54F4 DF37 9E96

"A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle." -- Erin Majors

* NOTE: Don't try to reach me through this address, use "contact@" instead.