[ale] Subversion usage

[fletch at phydeaux.org]

>>>>> "Pete" == Pete Hardie <pete.hardie at gmail.com> writes:


[...]
    Pete> tools.  Is it better/typical to create a repository per
    Pete> project, or just one big repository with each project a
    Pete> subdir?

Depends. :)


As far as I've noticed the advantages to one big repo:

  * everything's in one place (which of course could also be a
    disadvantage in the eggs-in-one-basket sense)

  * can copy with history between different sub-projects

  * only one place to maintain hook scripts and what not


Disadvantages:

  * revision numbers climb globally for each change to the repo as a
    whole, so you may commit r123 of .../foo/trunk/zorch.c, not change
    anything for months in the foo project, and then the next commit
    to it is r394 (not that there's anything wrong with that, it's
    just conceptually confuzzling if you're of a CVS background)

  * if you do need customized hook behavior for different projects
    your hook scripts need to be smarter to discern to which project a
    given transaction belongs


And pretty much the inverse of all those are true for multiple
repositories.  I'm in the process of moving the group I work for over
to SVN from CVS and went the multiple repository route (one for Perl,
one for C++ library foo, one for C++ library bar, . . .) and that's been
working pretty well (so far :).

-- 
Fletch                | "If you find my answers frightening,       __`'/|
fletch at phydeaux.org|  Vincent, you should cease askin'          \ o.O'
                      |  scary questions." -- Jules                =(___)=
                      |                                               U