A needle of Hope
amid a haystack of Chaos.

WANdisco vs Apache

Created: Tuesday, January 4th, 2011
11:39:00 CST

Original: https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/apache_subversion_to_wandisco_1

To "", your angry rhetoric seems way over the top to me, a long—time user of CVS, SVN, BZR and other SCMs.

To me, a complete outsider to the byzantine world of SVN development, all of the problems David pointed out in his blog posts are problems I have personally experienced —— and caused me great pain and loss of productivity —— for more than half a decade with SVN. I swear, merging wasn't nearly so scary with CVS, because at least it was a more transparent (if faulty) process!

As an end—user, I actually thought SVN was dead, especially circa 2006 before the 1.6 release. I found 1.5 to be so buggy, especially regarding merging, that it was beyond a joke. I lost entire repositories due to simplistic SVN merges and found an alternative called BZR, which sports SVN backward compatibility in command structure and also has a BZR—SVN bridge so that you can use it to read/write/branch existing SVN repositories.

If David had made these same statements and promises in mid—2007, I would have given SVN far more of a benefit of a doubt back then. If the community wasn't attacking him —— irrationally and with much anger —— his statements would have given me renewed hope in the future of SVN: at least *someone* is doing something!

But now, now I wonder if the SVN project will even commit the patchsets developed by David's corporation, or any others that address these serious issues.

tl;dr: Based upon the collective and individual ("") responses, I actually wish *someone* wish vision, talent and time (like David's corp) would just go ahead and fork the project...as publicly as possible.