Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- From: Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 12:56:36 +0200
On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 20:38 +1000, Damian S wrote:
3 or 4 people are not many, it's "sightly above 1" :)There is no "better". There is "different".Exactly.
I happily use SVN on my projects which only I commit to. Although I am
the only committer, this code needs to be pushed out to multiple
machines, both public and private.
I'll still use SVN if I get several other collaborators, but once there
are more than 3 or 4 people committing, I'll move to git which uses a
superior model for large numbers of committers.
It's an amount of users any VCS should be able to handle.
FWIW, SVN was not designed to be the 'best'.A matter of perspective.
It was meant to be a better CVS than CVS, and in that goal, succeeded.
SVN has over CVS is it allowing renaming files and it being lessFrom my point of view, on the client side, the only real advantage that
demanding on very low bandwidth or very poor connections to the server.
SVN's major "con" is it being comparatively generous on local diskspace
and it polluting a checked out source trees with huge amount of
VCS-metadata files (git, mercurial do so as well).
Ralf
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- From: Todd Zullinger
- Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- References:
- Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- From: Armin Moradi
- Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- From: Thomas Thurman
- Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- From: Damian S
- Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- Prev by Date: Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- Next by Date: Re: Eliminating duplicate photos
- Previous by thread: Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- Next by thread: Re: Git vs. Subversion. Which one?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|