Luke, If the 3D models are "source" files, then I personally approve to put those files into a Subversion repo. That's what I do everyday with Electronic engineering CAD files. By the way, don't forget you may not be able to "diff" between two versions of a file. If not, you lose one the main strength of a Version control system: doing even a small rollback may become a pain... Plus if you can't diff, you probably can't merge either! I encourage you to use locks to avoid any form of conflicts. The "needs-lock" property can be useful.
As for the project status, I don't know anything but I would be curious to get the developers' point of view. Justin MASSIOT | Zentek On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 00:47, Luke Mauldin <lukemaul...@icloud.com> wrote: > Let me clarify. The binaries can be unity 3d models or other engineering > assets. They are not compiled code. > > > On Oct 27, 2021, at 5:42 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nka...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 6:31 PM Luke Mauldin <lukemaul...@icloud.com> > wrote: > >> > >> We are considering using Subversion for a project with large binary > files since it seems to have some strengths in that area compared to the > alternatives. But now that the Apache Software Foundation and most other > projects such LLVM and FreeBSD have migrated away from Subversion, what > does the future of Subversion look like? Is it still being actively worked > on? Is anyone sponsoring it? > > > > For me, subversion still has uses by compelling centralized change > > tracking, and by permitting checkouts of very small directories from a > > master repo or a designated tag. > > > > Large binaries..... just don't put those in source control. Put those > > in software packaging. >
