1.1 --- a/en/intro.tex	Tue Aug 26 14:14:19 2008 -0700
     1.2 +++ b/en/intro.tex	Wed Jan 07 23:42:24 2009 -0500
     1.3 @@ -373,11 +373,16 @@
     1.4  learn to use the other.  Both tools are portable to all popular
     1.5  operating systems.
     1.6  
     1.7 +Prior to version 1.5, Subversion had no useful support for merges.
     1.8 +At the time of writing, its merge tracking capability is new, and known to be
     1.9 +\href{http://svnbook.red-bean.com/nightly/en/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.advanced.finalword}{complicated
    1.10 +  and buggy}.
    1.11 +
    1.12  Mercurial has a substantial performance advantage over Subversion on
    1.13  every revision control operation I have benchmarked.  I have measured
    1.14  its advantage as ranging from a factor of two to a factor of six when
    1.15  compared with Subversion~1.4.3's \emph{ra\_local} file store, which is
    1.16 -the fastest access method available).  In more realistic deployments
    1.17 +the fastest access method available.  In more realistic deployments
    1.18  involving a network-based store, Subversion will be at a substantially
    1.19  larger disadvantage.  Because many Subversion commands must talk to
    1.20  the server and Subversion does not have useful replication facilities,