Yes, svn sucks even more than CVS.
“If you are using Subversion, stop it. Just stop. Subversion = Leeches. Mercurial and Git = Antibiotics.”
-- Joel Spolsk
“Sticking to subversion is like installing Windows 95 on your developers’ PCs. If they don’t know anything better they won’t complain, though it might not be a bright decision from a management viewpoint.”
“[Svn is] the IE6 of version control”
-- James S.
Subject: Re: BK is *evil* corporate software [was Re: New BK License Problem?] Received: Mon Oct 7 16:39:03 2002 Sent: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 17:36:42 -0400 (EDT) Name: Alexander Viro Email: email@example.com Id: Pine.GSO.firstname.lastname@example.org Inreplyto: 20021007204414.GD7428@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Pavel Machek wrote: > Good thing for who? > > Good thing for Larry? I don't know. > > Good thing for us? I don't think so. > > Good thing for subversion developers? Definitely not. Damn you. That thread got me to download subversion source and read it - mistake I won't repeat any time soon. I've spent several months wading through fairly disgusting code - block device drivers are not pretty, ditto for devfs. I had more than once found myself grabbing Lovecraft to read something that would be less nightmare-inducing. But _THAT_ takes the fscking cake - I don't _care_ what Larry (or anybody else for that matter) does to people who had excreted that code. No, wait - I _do_ care. I want video of the... event. I don't use BK, but you can be damn sure that I won't touch SVN. Ever. -
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [1/2many] - FInd the maintainer(s) for a patch - scripts/get_maintainer.pl From-R13: Oy Hveb <ivebNsgc.yvahk.bet.hx> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:41:30 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: 20070816154029.GN21089@ftp.linux.org.uk On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 12:58:19PM +0200, Rene Herman wrote: > Googling around, I see subversion already has this and calls the meta-data > "properties" (svn propset/get and friends). It uses a few properties > itself, such as the svn:executable property (which I saw is also the only > permission bit git keeps) and svn:ignore, which serves the same role as the > .gitignore files for git. Both those would fit into this scheme nicely for > git as well, if git were to do something similar and reserve for example > the "git.*" namespace for internal use. "svn does it" is usually an indication of a bad idea, but anyway - it's fundamentally wrong in this case, simply because "$FOO is interested in $BAR" is a property of $FOO, not of $BAR.
- Subversion sucks, get over it – by Andreas Jacobsen.
- Why SVN sucks – by resmo.
- Why Subversion sucks – wiki page from the Chaos Computer Club Cologne.
- Why SVN sucks – More reasons…
- Did I mention that svn sucks?
- Linu’s talk about Git – contains some apt (but not as harsh as they should have been) comments regarding cvs and svn.
- Subversion sucks (more than CVS!) – Blog post by Kelly Yancey.