Hello Branko, On 21.07.19 07:24, Mechtilde wrote: > > Am 21.07.19 um 02:01 schrieb Branko Čibej: >> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 01:42 Peter Kovacs, <pe...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi brane, >>> >>> The threads are linked in my first post. >>> >> Thanks ... Sorry I missed those. you are welcome. No issue. >> >> >>> It is for me a workflow thing. >>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one. >>> >> >> Which particular "decentralised" feature do you miss most? For example, >> there's work going on to implement client-side shelving (similar to 'git >> stash'), it's experimental but available in various forms in the last 3 >> Subversion (minor) releases > Most of the missing features were the reason why Git was developed. > As Peter said SVN is centralized, Git is decentralized. > With Git you can do your own home branch without publishing for testing. > And then you can do a Merge Request (on Github it is named Pull Request) > With Git you need one Repo e.g. with the two branches trunk and 42x. > With SVN you have two branches to checkout. So you need double space to > hold the repo locally for testing I am not sure what you mean, you can do a SVN switch <branch path>, which IMO does the same thing as you would do in git with git checkout <branch>. I would probably clone 2 times with git anyhow. So for me there is no difference.
Let me recap as use case description. Maybe it is more helpful. 1) As a user I want to be able to version my personal changes without affecting other developers. 2) As a user I want to be able to have an intermediate repository, to be able to checkout on different VMs in order to do private testing before publishing. 3) As a user I would like to alias commands to my need or whish and trade these settings with others developers in m community. 4) As a user I want o be aware how the SVN right management is set. We had issues with this. This was not the decision in favour for git but for cWiki. And I add this now, since I do a use case recap :P 5) As a user I want to be able to design workflows, for commits, triggering tasks. For example review a commit fron annoymous login, before commit is done. (The "github" feature ;) ) >> I assume you mean git-svn? I'm not surprised. >> >> Thanks for taking the time to respond. Looks like nothing short of making >> svn just another git would make you change your mind. :) > No. I have no requirement for SVN to copy git. There are sufficient other ways to full fill the requirements i have. And we do initiate the switch after 2 years the decision have been made. That should tell you how important the switch has been in the last 2 years. I have no issues in returning to SVN in future. And I hope SVN sticks around. I like to have it on work. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
