On 20/06/2013, at 23:03, Julian Elischer <jul...@freebsd.org> wrote: >> And do you think that the sort of user who is sufficiently engaged with the >> project to do this is the sort of user who would not be willing to do so if >> it meant installing the subversion port? If so, then there is a clear case >> for svnlite. > > I think that it lowers the barrier.. once you start bringing ports into the > picture you start running the risk of port revision hell.
If there is a statically linked port & corresponding package then the barrier is almost as low, but has a few other advantages that other people have listed. That approach has a small footprint (binary + man page), is always up to date (so the VCS infrastructure is not tied to the earliest version of SVN) and doesn't have any dependencies. -- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
