User Reviews
SVN is great
by ajdlinux
SVN is what CVS should have been - it has pretty much everything CVS has, except it's easier - no 'login' commands and CVSROOT environment variables and huge long authentication details and so on, just a simple URL.
The only problem I have with it is that when you mess up your WC SVN makes it pretty hard to fix up, but then again I don't know whether CVS or darcs or whatever does it any better.
5 of 11 users found the following review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes | No
External File
by zote
I think a good feature that svn need is support to shared files (external files) like it does with folders.
0 of 1 users found the following review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes | No
SVN over CVS
by rampurhaat
SVN does happen to be what CVS should have been in many ways. The setup is easy and the commands are quite similar to CVS, in fact the same in many cases.
The best part I love on SVN is the folder structure management. If you want to change your file/folder hirerarchy in CVS then that is a big pain. Life is way smoother with SVN - you never realize (barring the prefix in the SVN comman) that you are not on your local filesystem - it is
0 of 1 users found the following review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes | No
Not much better than CVS
by drbrain
I don't see what I get out of SVN that CVS is missing. Changesets? big deal!
No built-in branch tracking ala p4's integrate. (Hidden away in the svnmerge add-on.)
Uses less-featureful diff (no -p, -b, -c, -i), and less-reliable diff3 (has given me bad merges).
Can't set default diff arguments ala CVS in a config file without writing a shell script.
Feels slower than CVS.
Can't get all the info for a
10 of 26 users found the following review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes | No