Impression about svn from bzr point of view

[Alexander Belchenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At this weekend I participated in ICFP Programming Contest
http://www.icfpcontest.org/

Our team used Python as primary programming language,
and svn repository (hosted at google) for work.
Our team is distributed across Ukraine.
But my rant only about svn.

This was first time I intensively used svn from command line.
Although TortoiseSVN is nice tool, but using svn from
command line is somewhat ugly after bzr experience.
I read that svn command line client is more supposed to work
with other programs/tools, but it's too much user unfriendly.

Starting from the point when I can't commit (by default) if I provide
message (svn ci -mXXX) that match to some existing filename in the tree,
even if this filename is actually directory! svn wants from me --force-log
flag. It's ugly.

Although svn by default want to have commit message in utf-8, even on windows
console, where utf-8 never used.

Although, svn don't handle gracefully broken pipe situation, problem that we fight
too much in bzr (and finally beat it down in 0.18! /for win32)

And disconnected operations, of course. Distributed nature of bzr wins in this category,
no doubts.

May be I could find more unpleasant things, but my participation is mostly
over, and I can drop off svn again.

In short: bzr is better a lot, but having central server with built-in
authentication is very good thing. I hope that bzr smart server will grow
really smart and can beat svn in the area of centralized VCS.

Ave Bazaar!

- --
[µ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGo9IVzYr338mxwCURAhl5AJ48jNURBYq0MJ0cVlC72nyQomTQZwCgiDFD
pvMF6iRS0jBPkqasZm8xFqs=
=+zbx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----