visual-studio AnkhSVN 与 VisualSVN

AnkhSVN vs VisualSVN

提问by Darko Z

We're thinking of switching to SVN at my work, so I was wondering about SVN plugins for VS2008 (and 2010 when it comes out). After a bit of research I found AnkhSVN and VisualSVN, the 2 that seemed most dominant. (I am aware of TortoiseSVN and will use the plugin in conjunction with it).

我们正在考虑在我的工作中切换到 SVN，所以我想知道 VS2008（以及 2010 出现时）的 SVN 插件。经过一番研究，我找到了 AnkhSVN 和 VisualSVN，这两个似乎最占优势。（我知道 TortoiseSVN 并将与它结合使用该插件）。

I am aware that this has been askedbefore, but these questions were asked almost a year ago and we all know that a lot of things can change in a year.

我知道以前有人问过这个问题，但这些问题是大约一年前提出的，我们都知道一年内可能会发生很多变化。

The question: From your experience, which is better and why?

问题：根据您的经验，哪个更好，为什么？

采纳答案by Ben Griswold

Granted, it has been a year since I've used each product head-to-head, but my current preference is AnkhSVN. Though folks grumbled about early versions of AnkhSVN, 2.0 was a near rewrite of the original and is now a full Source Control Provider Integration Package rather than a Visual Studio Add-In. With commercial backing from CollabNet and renewed open source enthusiasm, AnkhSVN 2.0 deserves a chance.

诚然，自从我面对面地使用每种产品以来已经一年了，但我目前的偏好是 AnkhSVN。尽管人们抱怨 AnkhSVN 的早期版本，但 2.0 几乎是对原始版本的重写，现在是一个完整的源代码控制提供程序集成包，而不是 Visual Studio 插件。有了 CollabNet 的商业支持和新的开源热情，AnkhSVN 2.0 值得一个机会。

My two favorite features of AnkhSVN are it is free and I love the Pending Changes window.

我最喜欢 AnkhSVN 的两个功能是它是免费的，我喜欢 Pending Changes 窗口。

As for VisualSVN, I find it to be sluggish and I feel it leverages TortoiseSVN rather than handling the file management itself far too often. And it costs money (albeit a small amount.)

至于 VisualSVN，我发现它很慢，而且我觉得它利用 TortoiseSVN 而不是太频繁地处理文件管理本身。而且它要花钱​​（尽管很少。）

Again, this is based on my last head-to-head test which was about 1 year ago. As already stated, TortoiseSVN is great on it's own, but if you really want to plug into the VS IDE, give AnkhSVN a whirl before VisualSVN. Best of luck.

同样，这是基于我大约一年前的最后一次面对面测试。如前所述，TortoiseSVN 本身就很棒，但如果你真的想插入 VS IDE，在 VisualSVN 之前试一试 AnkhSVN。祝你好运。

回答by Andrew Siemer

I have tried both of the VS plugins...after several months of use I quickly realized that I spent ALL of my time in Tortoise! The plugins don't get all of my trunk related items. They only work with items that are part of the solution and that VS recognizes. For this reason I spent pretty much all of my time in Tortoise...and eventually all of my time. There is no reason to pay for plugins when Toroise is both free and updated almost daily.

我已经尝试了这两个 VS 插件……使用几个月后，我很快意识到我把所有时间都花在了 Tortoise 上！插件没有得到我所有的行李箱相关项目。它们仅适用于属于解决方案且 VS 识别的项目。出于这个原因，我几乎所有的时间都花在了 Tortoise 上……最终我所有的时间都花在了 Tortoise 上。当 Toroise 免费且几乎每天更新时，没有理由为插件付费。

Stick with Tortoise and learn how to use it. You will be happier in the end.

坚持使用 Tortoise 并学习如何使用它。最后你会更快乐。

Responses:

回应：

@jeroenh: "... There really is an advantage of using a (properly integrated) VS plugin, namely when moving/renaming files in your solution. ..."

@jeroenh：“……使用（正确集成的）VS 插件确实有一个优势，即在您的解决方案中移动/重命名文件时。……”

I agree that renaming/moving files in Tortoise is clumsy. And VisualSVN does make this easier.

我同意在 Tortoise 中重命名/移动文件很笨拙。而 VisualSVN 确实使这更容易。

@Darko Z: "on a personal level I agree, but on an organisational level I don't. We have a few people here that NEED VS integration. Yeah its silly but fair enough :)"

@Darko Z：“在个人层面我同意，但在组织层面我不同意。我们这里有一些人需要 VS 整合。是的，这很愚蠢但足够公平:)”

Yes, I have several people like that in my current team. And training them to get used to Tortoise has been a Bear! They are the reason that we got some licenses for VisualSVN..but they complained about that too.

是的，我现在的团队中有几个这样的人。训练他们习惯乌龟是一头熊！他们是我们获得一些 VisualSVN 许可证的原因……但他们也抱怨过。

回答by Wadih M.

I had the same dilemma as well a few months ago, and finally decided to go with VisualSVN. We've been using it for 4 months for C# inhouse web application development and our experience has been positive.

几个月前我也有同样的困境，最后决定使用 VisualSVN。我们已经将它用于 C# 内部 Web 应用程序开发 4 个月，我们的经验是积极的。

Firstly, the server part integrates with Active Directory and offers an easy to use MMC control for managing the repositories.

首先，服务器部分与 Active Directory 集成并提供易于使用的 MMC 控件来管理存储库。

Secondly, the client part integrates with VS2008, doesn't slow down Visual Studio loading times, and works with pretty trivial color codes (green for untouched files, yellow for files you changed). It features full revision diff's, you can comment every revision.

其次，客户端部分与 VS2008 集成，不会减慢 Visual Studio 加载时间，并且使用非常简单的颜色代码（绿色表示未触及的文件，黄色表示您更改的文件）。它具有完整的修订差异，您可以评论每个修订。

One down side is that its supports for hooks (like post-commit hooks) is very rudimentary.

一个缺点是它对钩子的支持（如提交后钩子）非常简陋。

You can view statistics like who made the most commits, etc. It supports branches although we don't use those features. All client-server communication is done through SSL (keys and certificates are configured automatically).

您可以查看统计信息，例如谁进行了最多的提交等。虽然我们不使用这些功能，但它支持分支。所有客户端-服务器通信都是通过 SSL 完成的（密钥和证书是自动配置的）。

I asked them a question at some point about how to delete the branch history from the Visual Studio dropdown, and their support answered that I simply needed to delete the .suo file (efficient customer service)

我在某个时候问过他们一个关于如何从 Visual Studio 下拉列表中删除分支历史记录的问题，他们的支持人员回答说我只需要删除 .suo 文件（高效的客户服务）

Finally, my experience from working with VisualSVN: simple and straightforward for our relatively small team. (we're 5 programmers, but I'm pretty sure this scales a lot more than that).

最后，我使用 VisualSVN 的经验：对于我们相对较小的团队来说简单明了。（我们有 5 名程序员，但我很确定这可扩展得多）。

回答by Lodle

I use VisualSVN at the moment, and it's great as it auto-adds any new files to the SVN and allows easy revert and diff without having to open an explorer window. However, you will still need to use TortoiseSVN for files not in your Visual Studio solution.

我现在使用 VisualSVN，它很棒，因为它会自动将任何新文件添加到 SVN，并且无需打开资源管理器窗口即可轻松恢复和差异。但是，对于不在 Visual Studio 解决方案中的文件，您仍然需要使用 TortoiseSVN。

Last time I used AnkhSVN it didn't work too well and screwed my SVN checkout up (but this was a couple years ago).

上次我使用 AnkhSVN 时，它运行得不太好，并且搞砸了我的 SVN 结帐（但这是几年前的事）。

回答by atconway

I have used both and prefer Visual SVN (as of v3.0.4) because of its integration with Tortoise SVN which I already use and am quite familiar with. Because of this familiarity and VisualSVN's integration with it I prefer it a bit more.

我已经使用了这两个并且更喜欢 Visual SVN（从 v3.0.4 开始），因为它与我已经使用并且非常熟悉的 Tortoise SVN 集成。由于这种熟悉程度以及 VisualSVN 与它的集成，我更喜欢它。

I believe there is argument that AnkhSVN (as of v2.4.11610) has more features integrated into VS.NET, but it is working with it's own dialog windows and prompts which are nothard to get used to, but again I liked the functionality and familiarity of Tortoise SVN.

我相信有一种说法是 AnkhSVN（从 v2.4.11610 开始）有更多的功能集成到 VS.NET 中，但它正在使用它自己的对话框窗口和提示，这并不难习惯，但我再次喜欢这些功能和熟悉 Tortoise SVN。

Also since all of my shop uses Tortoise SVN via Windows Explorer, the transition to Visual SVN ins't such a big deal other than adding the nice integration directly into VS.NET. I suffered none of the pitfalls commented in the other posts here (most are from 3-4 years ago it seems) when I used VisualSVN over the last 30 days.

此外，由于我所有的商店都通过 Windows 资源管理器使用 Tortoise SVN，因此除了将良好的集成直接添加到 VS.NET 之外，过渡到 Visual SVN 并没有什么大不了的。在过去的 30 天里，当我使用 VisualSVN 时，我没有遇到这里其他帖子中评论的任何陷阱（似乎大多数来自 3-4 年前）。

So here is what I say: if you are a heavy user of Tortoise SVN and like how it works, go with VisualSVN. If you are new to Subversion and really don't care, then going with the freeAnkhSVN with its additional integrated features is probably the way to go.

所以我要说的是：如果您是 Tortoise SVN 的重度用户并且喜欢它的工作方式，请使用 VisualSVN。如果您是 Subversion 的新手并且真的不在乎，那么使用具有附加集成功能的免费AnkhSVN 可能是您要走的路。

回答by Mark Stahler

That question you asked boils down to personal preference but I would advise you to have IN ADDITIONto the ide client either Tortoise SVN or the command line client. You will often be forced into positions where the IDE client cannot perform the task you need.

你问这个问题归结为个人喜好，但我会建议你有另外的IDE客户端无论是乌龟SVN或命令行客户端。您经常会被迫处于 IDE 客户端无法执行您需要的任务的位置。