

Subversion in 2010 and Beyond - voxio
http://subversion.wandisco.com/component/content/article/2-news/30-subversion-in-2010-and-beyond-see-the-presentations.html

======
devdev
Some interesting data from a survey: <http://www.ddj.com/architect/222301141>

Quote: "More than one-third of developers use Subversion for source code
management; that's almost triple the share of the next most used SCM tool,
Microsoft SourceSafe"

~~~
j_baker
That sourcesafe is the second most used SCM scares me.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
I'd be interested to hear the opinions of HN'ers. Is there any reason these
days to choose SubVersion over git?

~~~
buro9
We've had this debate before, but something along the lines of:

* No GUI for Git on Windows

* Everything knows how to work with Subversion already (tools, testing, continuous integration, idiots)

* Companies like centrally controlled and backed up solutions

* Why change when what you have works for you

~~~
dlsspy
> Companies like centrally controlled and backed up solutions

git wins fast over svn for backups.

git backups are redundant, always up-to-date, easily verifiable, and easy to
turn into proper master repositories.

The more people you have working on a project, the harder it gets for anything
to get lost.

~~~
rs
To be fair to the subversion guys, its pretty darn easy to setup real-time
backups. Use svnsync and hook it up in some post-commit hook.

Having said that, to have git completely backed up, it's not as simple as a
clone. You will need to mirror another repository so that you can get all of
the branches, tags, etc. Additionally you will need some sort of post-receive
hook so that your mirror is kept up-to-date.

Now, my conclusion with backups for svn and git - both need some intervention.
Its not as simple as "press this button and it just works".

