On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Karl Fogel <kfo...@red-bean.com> wrote:
> So maybe a way to approach this is to ask: > > For those for whom Subversion is currently the best solution, what > *else* do they need it to do? >From users I have heard from the two main themes would be: 1) Performance 2) Handling of move/renames Of course there are always other issues like server-based configuration etc. but these seem to be the consistently mentioned themes. And I call them themes because both of these manifest in a lot of different ways and need improvements in many areas across the product. It is probably worth noting that Git, and probably all of the DVCS options, are particularly strong in these two areas. I suspect if we could make significant improvements in these areas we would remove the desire of a lot of people to migrate away from SVN. I still believe the number of users that want or need the distributed workflow model is a small minority, especially in the corporate world. I also think as a community we need to do a better job evangelizing the strengths of SVN against the DVCS tools, in addition to addressing the areas where we are weaker and can make improvements. BTW, I do not think Mike was suggesting we try to be a compelling replacement for DVCS. I assumed that was a semi-joke or was at least meant to make the point that we as a community need to decide what we want to be. Perhaps more importantly what do we want to be that we are also committed to implementing. -- Thanks Mark Phippard http://markphip.blogspot.com/
