From: Trans <transfire@...>
Date: 2007-03-15T16:26:52+09:00
Subject: Re: Why SVN?



On Mar 14, 9:07 pm, "Austin Ziegler" <halosta...@gmail.com> wrote:

> People say that distributed systems have cheap branching, but I find
> that very hard to believe, since (at least in the ones that I've
> tried, and I have a hard time imagining how others would differ) the
> branches are physical copies in a different location. That's cheap for
> the making, yes, but your total storage cost goes up (since none of
> the advantages of having a single repository can be found) and it then
> becomes possible to *lose* branches from your repository (cf fragility
> above).

I have actually given that some thought. While not the case presently,
I think eventually this will become a mute point. Ultimately file
systems themselves will manage data redundancy. I think of it as
"holographic" memory. I don't know why exactly as it has nothing much
to do with actual holographs, but it sounds cool ;-)

For fun I started writing a version control system in Ruby just to get
a better understanding of the concepts. Turns out not to be so hard
really --at least for a simple model.

In any case, as far your advice. I'm taking it, but with Matz' twist.
My two main projects consist of many subprojects. I figure I can use
Subversion on the project as a whole, but Git on each subproject. Well
that's the theory. Let you know how it goes.

T.