, I just must say that I agree with you: svn is so awful comparing to mercurial or git. I hate svn for the every-day dilemma: should I commit now or should I test or improve added functionality?
. I also don't like it for ugly support of ignoring files (single .hgignore/.gitignore file is much more clear and compact than svn's approach)
And, of course, general design of mercurial/git (save changesets
, not revisions
) is superior to svn in case of branching. Here, I must note that we haven't many developers so this one is probably not crucial (at least for now). BUT, at the other side, using svn probably repels new developers from this project, as it repelled personally me. My short story: I'm really, really amazed by existing functionality of DC, it is purely life-changing project for me, because now I can use Linux with powerful file manager just like Total Commander. But, I feel lack of some features, so I wanted to participate. When I was figuring out how to develop DC, I got two disappointments: firstly, I personally don't like pascal (but Alex does, and, after all, it is a matter of taste). And secondly, ugly svn! I can't agree that it is matter of taste too; svn has no advantages (that I'm aware of) comparing to mercurial/git, but it has several huge disadvantages. And I decided: no, maybe later.
Well, after some time, I participated anyway, in the client/server and command line params part, as you might see in recent commits log. But, the fact is that svn is repellently painful.
As far as I see, Alex won't change it, but anyway, I wanted to say that I agree: svn sucks.