Mercurial > hgbook
diff en/intro.tex @ 418:1d277d6aa187
Merge
| author | Bryan O'Sullivan <bos@serpentine.com> |
|---|---|
| date | Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:14:24 -0700 |
| parents | f3bef43b8ca1 635d7c0fcac3 |
| children |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/en/intro.tex Tue Aug 26 14:14:19 2008 -0700 +++ b/en/intro.tex Tue Aug 26 14:14:24 2008 -0700 @@ -373,11 +373,16 @@ learn to use the other. Both tools are portable to all popular operating systems. +Prior to version 1.5, Subversion had no useful support for merges. +At the time of writing, its merge tracking capability is new, and known to be +\href{http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.finalword}{complicated + and buggy}. + Mercurial has a substantial performance advantage over Subversion on every revision control operation I have benchmarked. I have measured its advantage as ranging from a factor of two to a factor of six when compared with Subversion~1.4.3's \emph{ra\_local} file store, which is -the fastest access method available). In more realistic deployments +the fastest access method available. In more realistic deployments involving a network-based store, Subversion will be at a substantially larger disadvantage. Because many Subversion commands must talk to the server and Subversion does not have useful replication facilities,