subversion stability?

[Bryce Schober <br...@dpzone.com>]

I've been lurking around on this list for a while now, and I'd like to 
hear from both users and devs on the stability of subversion.  I know 
it's pre-1.0, but I've heard that it's pushing toward 1.0 pretty well.  
Our company would probably never migrate to sub from cvs until 1.0, but 
I have no idea what the timeframe is like.  On the status page, I see 3 
more incremental releases before beta, but I'm guessing that there are 
more to come.  I understand that there's no way I could get a date, but 
at least a rough timeframe for subversion stability would be nice, like 
3 months, 6 months, a year...  That way I'd have a better idea if I 
could be doing some personal testing of subversion to see how much of an 
advantage it would have for us over cvs without putting too much time 
into something that's unstable...

Thanks,
Bryce Schober

---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by digiposs.com]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org

Re: subversion stability?

[Jack Repenning <jr...@collab.net>]

At 12:49 PM -0700 8/29/03, Bryce Schober wrote:
>On the status page, I see 3 more incremental releases before beta, 
>but I'm guessing that there are more to come.

No, the intent there is that these are the only incrementals before beta.

>I understand that there's no way I could get a date, but at least a 
>rough timeframe for subversion stability would be nice, like 3 
>months, 6 months, a year...

Looking over the last couple incremental releases, and the work 
listed for these three,  I'm guessing 1.0 some time this calendar 
year.

>That way I'd have a better idea if I could be doing some personal 
>testing of subversion to see how much of an advantage it would have 
>for us over cvs without putting too much time into something that's 
>unstable...

It's certainly stable enough for that.  Pick an incremental release 
(give it a couple days after it comes out, just to be sure), install 
it consistently throughout your test environment, and go for it.  As 
you can see from the website, many people (not least the SVN 
community itself) have been using Subversion for production work for 
quite some time now.  There are some refinements left to implement, 
but the major 1.0 feature set is in place; there are some functional 
bugs in need of fixing, but not major ones; there are definitely some 
performance problems we have ever expectation of fixing--but as long 
as you know that, it shouldn't harm your evaluation.

Really, there are only two senses in which Subversion could presently 
be called "unstable":

* Until we reach 1.0, we're not guaranteeing interoperability between 
arbitrary (intermediate) releases.  If you get into the habit of 
updating frequently, then you'll have to update all your machines 
pretty much at once.  That's simply a normal "in-development" policy, 
though, not a quality problem.  1.0 will be interoperable with all 
1.X.

* New stuff continues to appear all the time.  That, too, is a normal 
state for code in this state.  But you can check the bug list to see 
what new stuff can be expected and when; what you'll find, I think, 
is that once again this shouldn't hurt your evaluation any.
-- 
-==-
Jack Repenning
CollabNet, Inc.
8000 Marina Boulevard, Suite 600
Brisbane, California 94005
o: 650.228.2562
c: 408.835-8090

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org