Apache Subversion is a version control option that is free to download and open source under the Apache 2.0 license.
N/A
Plastic SCM
Score 8.2 out of 10
Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
Plastic SCM is a full stack version control system that aims to make software configuration easy. It focuses on enabling dev teams get work done by facilitating branching, diffing and merging. The vendor says that for those purposes it provides cross-platform apps and GUIs with: Branch explorer Diffing and merging tools (both syntactic and semantic) On-premises and cloud repo management Code review mergebots (last mile…
$6.95
per user
Pricing
Apache Subversion
Plastic SCM
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Cloud Edition
$6.95
per user
Team Edition (on prem)
$9.95
per user
Enterprise Edition
$23.25
per user
Enterprise Edition (perpetual)
$595.00
per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache Subversion
Plastic SCM
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
* Educational institutions receive a substantial discount on Plastic SCM licensing fees
* Corporate/volume pricing is available
* For more information, please contact sales at sales@codicesoftware.com
Subversion solves our software versioning problem by providing tools for conflict resolution when doing collaborative work on the same files and projects. We use it with TortoiseSVN and it works great for some of our projects with smaller teams. However, we have a need to make code reviews more and it is a little more difficult to do that in SVN, compared to Bitbucket and Git.
Plastic SCM is well suited for the distributed development environment, where branching and merging can easily be handled. Its a good tool for version controlling, especially for a big team which is contributing to a big project simultaneously. Situation where Plastic SCM is not at all well suited are : If the project is smaller one and need to be handled by couple of people. So in that case setting up Plastic SCM and educating people to work on it is not at all efficient
Refactoring the layout of a respoitory--or a part of a repository--can be a bit painful, especially for users with workspaces associated with the affected part of the repository. Not sure what could be done to make that better, but it would be nice if something was possible.
Folks coming from Git can have problems using Subversion. Again, not sure anything can (or should) be done to address that, but it is occasionally an issue.
While there are interesting alternatives, such a GIT, Subversion has been a breath of fresh air compared to its predecessors like CVS or Microsoft Source Safe (now called Team Foundation Server). Its ease of use and high adoption rate is going to keep me using this product for years to come.
After Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was discontinued, we chose Subversion and it was a great choice. We were able to migrate to Apache Subversion very quickly and easily and benefited immediately from its non-locking workflow (SourceSafe required users to "lock" the file when editing to prevent editing conflicts from other users, whereas Subversion allows multiple users to edit the same file simultaneously and then merge conflicts later.)
While we still use Apache Subversion for our legacy projects, we've migrated to Git and GitHub for our new projects as that is the new "cool kid" and it provides some benefits such as distributed and offline development. But Git is more complex than Apache Subversion and not as easy to learn.
Plastic has best integration with unity - zero issues, native, straightforward. GitHub feels more stable but for smaller and or indie teams plastic s version control feels much more under control - you click, you feel safe. moreover, there is no need for extra tools such as gitkraken, gitlab, Sourcetree, fork, etc. it is really easy to develop games this way.
It allowed us to deliver the right files to our customer without "clobbering" previous releases, making for a far more satisfied customer.
It allowed our developers to work on two releases in parallel (plus an occasional third, for emergency fixes).
With some simple hooks, it allowed us to set up a system where code was was automatically deployed to test servers as soon as developers committed it, making testing easier. This was made easier by virtue of being a ColdFusion project, which requires no compilation. However, that is possible for compiled code with a continuous integration system like Jenkins.
