Re: OT: Good SVN How-To?

Rob Gaddi wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:40:09 -0500
> Tim Wescott <> wrote:
>
>> A project I'm working on just shoved me over the threshold from RCS
>> to SVN -- I just have to track multiple branches on this one.
>>
>> But I'm not a version control maven, I'm a @#$% algorithm guy!
>>
>> Any good SVN "How To's" out there? If O'Reilly has a book I'll
>> probably buy it, but a good web-based one that's on the dips**t level
>> (if you want to do "A" then type "B") would be nice in the mean time.
>>
>
> If you're running Windows, grab yourself a copy of TortoiseSVN. The
> documentation's pretty good, and more importantly, as software it's
> got a very high "it just works" factor.
>
> On an unrelated note, the same author's StExBar is one of the things
> that makes life under Windows livable.

Tim, I'll be the nay sayer here. I didn't like TortoiseSVN but maybe for
reasons that don't matter to you. We use SmartSVN because I find it more
similar to Visual SourceSafe. Compared to Tortoise which is an explorer
integration only (unless it has changed), SmartSVN is both an integration
and a stand alone app. I find it quite user friendly.

On the minus side, SmartSVN isn't free. You can do a trial for free, but a
license is under $100.

One other note on SVN itself. If branches are your primary interest, make
sure to follow their recommended (read "required") layouts, i.e., everything
project has its root in \trunk, with parallel \tags and \branch. I find
this terribly inconvenient for our project format so we don't use it, and
consequently, can not uses tags or branches.

--
Scott
Validated Software
Lafayette, CO



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4548 (20091027) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

Not Really Me wrote:

> One other note on SVN itself. If branches are your primary interest, make
> sure to follow their recommended (read "required") layouts, i.e., everything
> project has its root in \trunk, with parallel \tags and \branch. I find
> this terribly inconvenient for our project format so we don't use it, and
> consequently, can not uses tags or branches.
>

Not sure that is the case, although I could be wrong. I thought you
could organise your repository directory structure in any way you like -
when you branch/tag you just have to provide the path to where the
branch/tag is to be stored.

SVN does not draw any distinction between branches and tags, so using
different directories for each allows some organisation to be
maintained. You can have as many directories and sub directories under
the \tags and \branch paths as you like.

--

Regards,
Richard.

+ http://www.FreeRTOS.org
Designed for Microcontrollers. More than 7000 downloads per month.

+ http://www.SafeRTOS.com
Certified by TÜV as meeting the requirements for safety related systems.

On Oct 27, 7:23*am, "Not Really Me"
<sc...@validatedQWERTYsoftware.XYZZY.com> wrote:
> Rob Gaddi wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:40:09 -0500
> > Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:
>
> >> A project I'm working on just shoved me over the threshold from RCS
> >> to SVN -- I just have to track multiple branches on this one.
>
> >> But I'm not a version control maven, I'm a @#$% algorithm guy!
>
> >> Any good SVN "How To's" out there? *If O'Reilly has a book I'll
> >> probably buy it, but a good web-based one that's on the dips**t level
> >> (if you want to do "A" then type "B") would be nice in the mean time.
>
> > If you're running Windows, grab yourself a copy of TortoiseSVN. *The
> > documentation's pretty good, and more importantly, as software it's
> > got a very high "it just works" factor.
>
> > On an unrelated note, the same author's StExBar is one of the things
> > that makes life under Windows livable.
>
> Tim, I'll be the nay sayer here. *I didn't like TortoiseSVN but maybe for
> reasons that don't matter to you. *We use SmartSVN because I find it more
> similar to Visual SourceSafe. *Compared to Tortoise which is an explorer
> integration only (unless it has changed), SmartSVN is both an integration
> and a stand alone app. I find it quite user friendly.

I don't miss having a standalone app to deal with svn under Windows.
And I REALLY don't miss VSS.

> On the minus side, SmartSVN isn't free. *You can do a trial for free, but a
> license is under $100.
>
> One other note on SVN itself. *If branches are your primary interest, make
> sure to follow their recommended (read "required") layouts, i.e., everything
> project has its root in \trunk, with parallel \tags and \branch. *I find
> this terribly inconvenient for our project format so we don't use it, and
> consequently, can not uses tags or branches.

That comment about "required" layouts is not true. The recommended
layouts are just that: recommendations. You can organize your
repository in any way that makes sense to you. Under a project's root
directory you can have multiple "branches" or "trunks" that are called
whatever you wish.

The only distinction that TortoiseSVN makes is that if you check out
something that is under a "tags" directory in the repo, TSVN marks the
entire checkout as read-only in the local filesystem. This is its
simplistic way of enforcing the gentlemen's agreement that tags are
immutable.

-a

David Brown wrote:
> FreeRTOS info wrote:
>> Not Really Me wrote:
>>
>>> One other note on SVN itself. If branches are your primary
>>> interest, make sure to follow their recommended (read "required")
>>> layouts, i.e., everything project has its root in \trunk, with
>>> parallel \tags and \branch. I find this terribly inconvenient for
>>> our project format so we don't use it, and consequently, can not
>>> uses tags or branches.
>>
>> Not sure that is the case, although I could be wrong. I thought you
>> could organise your repository directory structure in any way you
>> like - when you branch/tag you just have to provide the path to
>> where the branch/tag is to be stored.
>>
>> SVN does not draw any distinction between branches and tags, so using
>> different directories for each allows some organisation to be
>> maintained. You can have as many directories and sub directories
>> under the \tags and \branch paths as you like.
>>
>
> Correct - you can organise things exactly as you see fit. It is quite
> reasonable, for example to have something like this:
>
> \mainboard
> \trunk
> \tags
> \release1.00
> \release1.01
> \branches
>
> \slaveboard
> \trunk
> \microcontroller
> \fpga
> \tags
> \release1.00
> \branches
>
>
> Organise the directories as you see fit for the project in question.

You are all correct, "required" was a mistake. Maybe some of the problem
lies with SmartSVN. It tells me I can not make a tag because I do not have
"trunk"

Due to our layout though, I still don't see a reasonable solution. Let me
give an example. Maybe I don't understand SVN well enough.

\rtos
\core
\docs
\subfolders...
\src
\subfolders...

\port1
\docs
\subfolders...
\src
\subfolders...

\port2
\docs
\subfolders...
\src
\subfolders...

\tcpip
... same as above

FWIW, the subfolders are all 2-3 layers deep.

In an ideal situation I would want to "tag" a product port and have it
include the product core at the same time. Even better, some tags should
span multiple products.

Taking the SmartSVN folks at their word, I would need to have \trunk, \tags,
etc., somewhere. Where would I put them, at the very top level? Doesn't a
tag/branch then make a copy of the entire repository?

Scott



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4558 (20091030) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

Not Really Me wrote:

> Tim, I'll be the nay sayer here. I didn't like TortoiseSVN but maybe for
> reasons that don't matter to you. We use SmartSVN because I find it more
> similar to Visual SourceSafe. Compared to Tortoise which is an explorer
> integration only (unless it has changed), SmartSVN is both an integration
> and a stand alone app. I find it quite user friendly.
>
> On the minus side, SmartSVN isn't free. You can do a trial for free, but a
> license is under $100.
>

Have they changed the conditions ?.

I have SmartSvn 3 (Syntevo) on a machine here and checking earlier it
asked me if I wanted to download a later version as it loaded. fwiw,
fwiw, I thought it looked far more polished than Tortoise, but that's
probably due to my aversion to any windows 'extensions'.

It cost me nothing, other than registration...

Regards,

Chris

Thanks to all for the suggestions. There seems to be hope for a solution
after all.

Scott



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4573 (20091104) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com