Apache Subversion is a version control system that helps manage file versions and collaborate effectively. It is widely used to store historical changes and track project versions efficiently.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Apache Subversion | 4.6% |
| Git | 13.4% |
| Bitbucket | 12.8% |
| Other | 69.2% |
Apache Subversion offers robust support for version tracking and collaborative development across teams. Known for its reliability, it allows managing multiple file and directory versions. Its powerful merging and branching capabilities enable teams to handle concurrent development streams with ease, ensuring integrity and consistency in project workflows.
What are the core features of Apache Subversion?Apache Subversion is integral in sectors like IT and development, where version control and collaboration are crucial. It supports development cycles in companies that require stringent version management, ensuring seamless project transitions from initial stages to deployment.
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Assistant Programmer at Mahadis | 3.0 | I've used Apache Subversion for over three years to manage centralized code repositories, but despite its reliability, it lacks modern features like CI/CD integration, leading us to gradually transition to platforms like Bitbucket for better functionality. |
| Senior Content Developer at Kinaxis | 3.5 | I use Apache Subversion as a code repository for training materials. The most valuable feature is its command-line interface, although the deployment process is complex. I have not considered or used any other solutions or cloud providers for this purpose. |
| Engineering Manager at Docaposte | 3.0 | I use Apache Subversion for code distribution, but I find Git more flexible due to its local repository feature. Subversion's stability and ease of use need improvement. Despite its simplicity compared to Git, I haven't seen a return on investment. |
| Assistant Director Implementation Services at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees | 4.5 | I've used this free, easy-to-install, and user-friendly solution for four years with no issues, making onboarding new joiners simple. My only criticism is its handling of complex merging. |
| Tech Lead at a aerospace/defense firm with 10,001+ employees | 3.5 | I found this open-source SCM tool easy for configuration management, though I experienced many stability and scalability issues. It's effective for individuals and small teams, but not an enterprise solution. |
The typical use case for Apache Subversion is to store the application code repositories, which is how we use this product in our company.
For multiple projects, we are using Apache Subversion, and for binary files, once the project is committed, we build the project to create artifacts. We store those artifacts in a separate artifact repository, not in Apache Subversion, because we must keep the minimum storage on the centralized server; otherwise, our repository will grow to a very big size.
I find the strong point of Apache Subversion to be that it is a centralized version control system, allowing us to keep our code repositories at a central server. This means that even if the end user system goes down, we have our code available at the centralized server, and multiple teams can connect together, collaborate, and contribute to the code on Apache Subversion.
The benefit of Apache Subversion to my organization is that we have a platform where we can host our code and maintain the versions of our applications.
There is room for improvement in Apache Subversion, especially when comparing it with other version control systems such as GitHub or GitLab, where many improvements could be made.
Improvements I would like to see in Apache Subversion include configurations, customizations, and functionalities such as those provided by GitHub Actions for immediate pipeline triggers, as well as the version controlling and CI/CD platform offered by GitLab.
In future updates of Apache Subversion, I would like to see CI/CD integrations as well as build and deployment servers.
The lack of latest features includes basic requirements such as pull requests, CI/CD platform integration, and artifact storage such as GitHub packages, which it does not offer.
I have been using Apache Subversion for more than three years.
I deployed Apache Subversion by myself using the Apache documentation, without any help or a team of specialists.
It took me around three to four days to deploy Apache Subversion, because not only the installation but the other repositories configuration I completed took around three to four days.
I have taken support from Apache during the migration from CVS to Apache Subversion initially, but currently, we don't have any active support.
Based on my experience with Apache Subversion's technical support, I would rate it an eight out of ten.
Positive
Before Apache Subversion, we worked with CVS.
As the person who did the deployment of Apache Subversion, I confirm that I was indeed responsible for it.
I have not seen any return on investment or cost reductions after implementing Apache Subversion, as we are currently migrating from Apache Subversion to Bitbucket for the CI/CD integrations and deployment. In terms of pricing, we cannot compare it with any other platform because Apache Subversion is very low in price.
I am satisfied with the pricing and licensing cost of Apache Subversion; it is very low compared to other products.
Currently, we are using a mixed kind of version controlling with Apache Subversion plus Atlassian Bitbucket, and we no longer use CVS.
I have utilized the atomic commits feature in Apache Subversion.
For the development process using Apache Subversion, we integrated it within the IDE, allowing each developer to commit, push code, and pull the code directly from the IDE.
We are using branching and merging functionalities in Apache Subversion.
These branching and merging features help maintain project versions by allowing one of our application teams, which has around 12 to 13 developers working on different feature sets, to create feature branches and separate environments for development, production, UAT, and staging. We have created separate branches accordingly, and the entire deployment process is dependent on those branches. When we push code to the development branch, the development CI/CD pipeline triggers, updating the development branch. Once the work on the development branch is done, we commit to the main branch to release the final version of our application.
Platform independence is important for our use of Apache Subversion; it is independent because our application is hosted on other EC2 instances, while Apache Subversion is completely isolated in different VPCs on AWS.
I rate Apache Subversion a six out of ten only because it does not offer any latest features.
We use it as a code repository for training materials.
We have developed automation to speed up common repetitive processes.
The most valuable feature is CLI.
The tool's deployment is complex.
I have been using the solution for ten years.
I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.
I rate Apache Subversion's scalability a ten out of ten.
I have never used tech support. I find information online.
The tool's price is good.
I rate the product a seven out of ten.
We use Git, we share code amongst our team.
We can release artifacts. Using other solutions, we can generate artifacts for processing.
As a developer, I write code and push it into the distribution repository.
Using Git can be more difficult than using Subversion, as Git has more advanced features and requires familiarity with Git flow. However, when using Git, we can customize our workflow according to our specific needs, such as our virtual learning logic.
Stability could be improved.
Apache Subversion should be easier to use.
I have been working with Apache Subversion for ten years.
We have had some issues with stability.
I would rate the stability of Apache Subversion a six out of ten.
Apache Subversion is a scalable solution.
We have our personal service, and we were nine developers.
In our company the whole company uses the same instances for Git, but in but last five years, we have had one instance, per project. For one instance, there were ten to twenty users.
I have not used technical support.
I am very satisfied with Git.
The benefit of using Git is that its architecture is more flexible compared to Apache Subversion.
With Git, each developer has their own local copy of the repository, which is not available in Subversion where only a central remote copy exists.
This may create difficulties in accessing resources that are only available on remote servers, such as certain users or artifacts.
This can make using an artifact on time problematic.
As a developer, I am not familiar with the initial setup.
This is more suitable for our DevOps Engineer.
I have not seen a return on investment.
There is no licensing fee.
I would not recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. We are using another solution.
I would recommend using Git.
I would rate Apache Subversion a six out of ten.
The ease of installation, configuration, and user friendliness.
The introduction to new joiners for source code control has become very easy.
Its handling of complex merging needs work.
I've used it for four years.
No issues encountered.
No issues encountered.
No issues encountered.
It's straightforward, as the documentation available is very user friendly.
We did it in-house.
We did not have to use budgeted cost to procure and use this product.
It's free as it's opensource.
It's easy, cost effective but not a enterprise tool therefore the community has to work with that direction.
1 year, deployed
No
Yes, lot of issues come up
Yes
5/10, the community helps a lot.
Technical Support:5/10, the community helps a lot.
No
Straightforward
Installed on my own
As an open source solution it's very effective, will be very useful for individual and for small teams.
Opensource tool, only have to bear development and maintenance costs.
Yes, other standard SCM tools.
Teams may use this tool for following activities:
1. Can be used in any organization for managing documents
2. Can be used by individuals for verifying the changes in the local copy, no need to install a dedicated server
3. Can be used to explore any tool functionality
4. Can be used for SCM as it's designed for.
