On Jul 24, Simon Strandgaard wrote:
> > Richard Kilmer wrote:
> > 
> >> I want to announce that we (InfoEther) have stood up a community server
> >> for Ruby projects here:
> >> 
> >>      http://www.rubyforge.org
> > 
> > Subversion is really superior to CVS and if Rubyforge would support it (in
> > addtition to CVS repositories), that would be great.
> 
> Subversion is really nice.. agree...  nice2have feature :-)

I've been following subversion development for two years, and we finally
took it out for a more complete test drive a couple of months ago, using it
for some small projects.  We're crying out for some of its features, and
the code looks very good (clean and documented).  I'll agree that
subversion will someday be much superior, but we didn't find it so yet.

It was a bear to compile and configure (couldn't get all the servers to
work on each of our platforms, but settled on the subversion server which
seemed to have the fewest problems).  Also, with a single tiny repository
and 3 people using it lightly, we got several database corruptions in a
single week which needed to be repaired.  One of these wasn't even
repairable with the recover command.

And we had root privileges to fix them, which not everyone will have.

It also has some annoying bugs when dealing with multiple/nested
repositories.

We had to conclude it wasn't ready yet, and believe me our requirements
can't be nearly as strict as something would be on Rubyforge where people
from all over the world would be using it.  We've been running our ruby
apps on CVS snapshots of ruby and SWIG--we're not averse to risk and the
cutting edge.

But having subversion corrupt its db all the time was too much even for us.

Do others have differing experiences with it?  I'd love to hear we've just
done something really dumb because we could really use subversion here...

-- 
Brett