SVN Problem

[eek]

It could be worse, current clientco are using TFS, and even VSS for some old legacy applications

Previous Clientco still used starteam. It was beyond tulip. However current clientcos tfs implementation is badbut I blame the person who managers it :

[minestrone]

Clearcase makes me cry.

[SpontaneousOrder]

I'm chuffed using git now, after 6 months of AccuRev.

[fullyautomatix]

In the past year for various gigs I have used TFS, SVN and Mercurial extensively.

TFS, just works and easy to understand and pretty simple yet powerful.

SVN, has a few limitations and can throw a strop for no reason and when it does you just cannot sort it out.

Mercurial, by far the best tool with great flexibility. Only drawback is the learning curve since its a bit different to others.

[Cliphead]

Suity, RTFM. It does help.

[yasockie]

Got a repo in the cloud.

It's still called the Internet (or a series of tubes)

[Dactylion]

Probably too late but:

Are you sure you are looking at the HEAD version in the repository?

Have you refreshed your Repo-Browser after your commit

Quite often muppets new users who think they know what they are doing because "Version Management " is "Version Management" innit have both a Repo-Browser open and their Working Directory and SVN refreshes are pretty dire.
another Grrrrr is when the Repo-Browser is set to display a specific commit (other than HEAD).
Commits etc (carried out from WrkDir) all work OK but the Repo-Brwser still shows the non-head revision (without all the new commits etc)

SVN (and Tortoise) are a bag of tulipe but they are fairly predictable.
OK they do sometimes c0ck up but normally it can be explained.