From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Ballard Subject: Re: can subversion 1.6 be made "just as distributed as git"? Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 02:27:26 -0700 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: MDellerus , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=C6var_Arnfj=F6r=F0_Bjarmason?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 04 10:27:41 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PDw6d-0001XG-2z for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 04 Nov 2010 10:27:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755581Ab0KDJ1b convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2010 05:27:31 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.213.46]:41540 "EHLO mail-yw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754363Ab0KDJ1a convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2010 05:27:30 -0400 Received: by ywc21 with SMTP id 21so1190948ywc.19 for ; Thu, 04 Nov 2010 02:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.171.2 with SMTP id f2mr246445ibz.63.1288862849697; Thu, 04 Nov 2010 02:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.1.14] (c-24-130-32-253.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.130.32.253]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 8sm12548309iba.10.2010.11.04.02.27.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 04 Nov 2010 02:27:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Nov 4, 2010, at 2:26 AM, =C6var Arnfj=F6r=F0 Bjarmason wrote: > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 01:58, Kevin Ballard wrote: >> Using "svnadmin hotcopy" you could certainly get your own local repo= , but I fail to >> see how you could easily join your history up with someone else's hi= story using this >> mechanism. If you really want to use SVN in a distributed manner, I = would recommend >> you simply use SVK. >=20 > SVK gives you *disconnected* SVN, not distributed. You still can't > (easily) share your > uncommited revisions with others. It just solves the problem of you > being on a plane > for a few hours. It doesn't turn SVN into Git. SVK bills itself as providing distributed patches, and calls itself "A = Distributed Version Control System". I do agree that it's mainly useful for using S= VN in a disconnected mode, but I trust that there's at least some facility for = sharing local branches with other SVK users, though I've certainly never done t= hat myself. -Kevin Ballard