Last Saturday's presentation on Subversion, the ubiquitous version control system, consisted in large part of a history of the entire issue of such systems' necessity. How does one organize a project to write a multi-thousand-line program using more than one programmer? As long as one person's writing the program, the problem never comes up. But hand the job to a department of two or more programmers and one needs a way to synchronize the effort.
It occurs to me that the two systems we've examined in detail so far typify the two large conceptual categories of the vast enterprise of software development. Whereas the open source model (illustrated by the development of Linux, for instance) might logically benefit from a decentralized system (like Bazaar), the closed source or corporate model might logically benefit from a centralized system (like Subversion). Ed suggested that the differences between the two categories of systems were less serious than many supposed, and that the considerable configuration options in both were sufficient to accommodate most situations. Furthermore, the claim that one system ate up storage space at a greater rate than the other was shown to be possible in both types, depending upon configuration and one's perspective regarding client or server.
Oops. My tendency to oversimplification is making Ed sound like the fence-sitter that I am, rather than the advocate he may prefer to be... but I'm in a hurry.
Coming up two weeks from last Saturday (August 8th, second Sat. of the month) will be my presentation on an animation program that runs under Linux. Which one? Ah, that would be telling. Stay tuned.
