Filed under: Software, Developer
Versions out of beta
Since getting schooled in the comments on my last mention of Versions (a favorite of Robert's), I've reacquainted myself with Subversion ... and come to really enjoy using this polished and highly usable SVN client. Git may have its benefits, but for a lot of what I do (especially solo web design), Subversion (and Versions) make a lot of sense. Versions is, as of yesterday, officially out of beta and available for purchase. I even received a 10% discount for being in on the beta test.
Versions 1.0.1 is already out, which fixes the registration issues that some of us ran into. The initial 1.0 release included a lot of additional functionality, and Versions has become an amazing tool for handling all manner of Subversion-related revision control. Top on the list of new features, and of pretty major importance (at least to me), is the addition of an "Ignore [file/folder name]" option to the context menu. The full release notes are available at the Versions site, where you'll also find the download for the free demo. Versions is retailing at €39.00 (about $49USD), and users on the email notification list should have received a 10% discount coupon number.
Thanks to everyone who sent this in!
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Chad said 11:59AM on 11-18-2008
I really wish they would support git, then I'd buy. I've switched to git for just about everything and even solo projects I can't see using svn anymore. Setting up a git repository is easier, branching is easier, merging works way more reliably, it's easier to share with others without stepping on each other's toes, etc. My only complaint is that some of the commands can be a bit cryptic. And there's no good GUI for it (GitNub is ok, but a bit basic). Versions for git would be incredible.
Reply
Stephen Korecky said 12:35PM on 11-18-2008
I agree. I use git for everything I do. However we still use SVN at work, which sucks, but versions has made some things better, I which there was branching and merging support...
As for GitNub, try GitX I like it a bit better, and it's true Cocoa, not ruby cooca
Dave said 1:02PM on 11-18-2008
Please articulate to me how exactly SVN "sucks"....
GIT people are so "leeter than thou" it gets old after a while
Chad said 1:08PM on 11-18-2008
I wouldn't say that svn sucks, but rather that git just works better most of the time.
The big problems I've had with svn are that it's merging is a bit sucky and it often fails to merge when there are nothing but difference in whitespace (lord help us if one person has a single tab indent in their editor whereas the other person has two spaces, svn gives a conflict on the entire file). Branching and merging are a pain. I've often gotten myself into problems where I deleted or replaced a file and svn just can't deal with it, forcing me to check out the entire repository and make a clean start. SVN also makes it really hard to develop experimental features without stepping on other developers.
The big advantage to git is that your own little repository is your own little repository. You can commit anything and everything you want and you don't have to worry about it breaking other developer's code until you get it to a point where you are ready to push it out to others. It also merges much more intelligently, and makes it easier to work with branches and keep them in sync.
Svn is fine. It's just that git works better, especially if you have multiple developers on the same codebase. Even for a single developer I think it's better, if nothing else creating your repository is as simple as going to the directory and typing 'git init'. DONE.
balls said 1:27PM on 11-18-2008
I dunno, SVN seems to work fine for mozilla, google, apache, python, ruby, mono etc etc.
balls said 1:35PM on 11-18-2008
@balls: eh mozilla doesn't use SVN.
Chris said 12:39PM on 11-18-2008
Already purchased m license yesterday. $50 well spent.
Reply
paul merrill said 12:25PM on 11-18-2008
I may be alone, but I don't know what an SVN client is.
Reply
h said 1:31PM on 11-18-2008
Therefore, you should leave this article without commenting and go to the following website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subversion_(software) Or google.
colouroflight said 3:28PM on 11-18-2008
@h
Wow, you're a dick.
balls said 1:30PM on 11-18-2008
You get almost all of these "features" for free with Tortoise SVN.
Why do you have to pay for things on a mac, that are free for Windows?
Reply
hans said 1:44PM on 11-18-2008
Oh you can use scplugin, which is free and the closest to tortoiseSVN on the Mac. SvnX too. Command line tools come free with the OS itself. Then again, I know a lot of professionals who uses SmartSVN on Windows/Linux, and it costs almost twice the price of Versions.
The bottom line is, a SVN client is necessary when working on larger project than YourMomsRecipeNotepad. Branch your project and merge it back a couple of months later, then come whining on the fact that tortoiseSVN does nothing to help you at all. Finally, when using/managing different repositories or just libraries with lots of custom properties and externals, you need a bookmark system and a GUI. TortoiseSVN is getting in your ways at that point.
TortoiseSVN is only good if you work as a single developer on a project and only do updates once a day and commit your changes. Try to do some SVN management (blame, history/log comparison, branch, merge, custom properties), and you're way better with a tool such as this one. My time is valuable, and software like this one saves me thousands of dollars a year. It's worth every penny.
Ebika said 1:46PM on 11-18-2008
There are plenty of free subversion clients for the mac too. This really isn't a mac vs. pc thing. Personally, I wouldn't spend $50 for a source control client. I'm not saying Versions isn't very pretty and capable, it just doesn't match what I'm willing to pay to interact with subversion.
balls said 1:53PM on 11-18-2008
A SVN Client is necessary when your team of developers are nothing more than internet script kiddies who couldn't program their way out of a paper bag.
We've written and entire enterprise level adaptive authentcation suite using nothing but tortoisesvn for our SVN client (except one hardcore guy who does everything via commandline).
When was the last time you used tortoiseSVN?
balls said 1:58PM on 11-18-2008
@Ebika: You made my point more eloquently: "Personally, I wouldn't spend $50 for a source control client."
Because on Windows, you get the nearly the same features for free.
I've used svnX, and it was still pretty early in dev.
CaptSaltyJack said 7:58PM on 11-18-2008
I'm somewhat unimpressed with Versions still. It needs better management of branching/merging. It's got a nice interface, but still feels a bit unwieldy.
And hans: you know not what you speak of. TortoiseSVN on Windows is just fine for multiple developers, IF you know how to use it properly. We use it at work with no issues whatsoever, and we branch and merge.
Misc. advice for those not wanting to drop big cash on an SVN client: just use the command line version. I'd upgrade it to 1.5.4 first, though, via DarwinPorts - http://darwinports.com/ - install that, then 'sudo port selfupdate' then 'sudo port install subversion'. Bam.
Reply
Tom said 6:36AM on 11-19-2008
I understand the freebie that is using the command line, but if you're not very savvy with the command line (or rather avoid like the plague as I do), do we have any recommendations of free GUI based SVN clients?
CaptSaltyJack said 11:48AM on 11-19-2008
Unfortunately not, Tom. I've tried tons of SVN GUIs out there for the Mac, most of them are not worth using. Versions has the best interface of them all, in my opinion.