+1 for Git.

Thanks, Michael for reviving this discussion.

Regards
--
Pritam Kute

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 3:30 PM Taher Alkhateeb <slidingfilame...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Jacques, I know you are a GUI fan, and for that I recommend this
> tool https://git-cola.github.io
>
> Make sure to install all requirements for a full enjoyable experience
> including viewing the history visually and whatnot
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 12:56 PM Jacques Le Roux
> <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have some tasks to do (like revert and merge scripts) but I see no
> problems with that.
> >
> > Apart that I have to think a bit more about the workflow (I guess
> Taher's proposition should be fine)
> >
> > I must though say that you will certainly see a slow-down on my side.
> I'm used to a bunch of svn tools I use and will have to find similar for
> Git. I
> > already use TortoiseGit for 5 years so it should not be a big deal...
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> > Le 15/01/2019 à 07:31, Swapnil Mane a écrit :
> > > +1 for using Git.
> > > Personally, my experience is also very good with Git.
> > >
> > >
> > > - Best Regards,
> > > Swapnil M Mane
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 2:05 PM Nicolas Malin <
> nicolas.ma...@nereide.fr>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 12/01/2019 20:56, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
> > >>> It's awesome to revive this discussion Michael. +1 of course.
> > >>>
> > >>> We need to think practically of our workflows though and whether we
> > >>> want a linear vs non-linear history model. I prefer the latter to
> > >>> allow proper decentralized workflows but it's up to everyone here to
> > >>> decide. I think the overall process is described thoroughly and we
> can
> > >>> adhere to it for the most part.
> > >> We can easily switch from svn to git without change own commit process
> > >> on first time by patch application.
> > >>
> > >> If a commiter want use merge feature, the squash function simulate the
> > >> application patch.
> > >>
> > >> So no opposite to move with this few remark
> > >>
> > >> Nicolas
> > >>
> > >>
>

Reply via email to