Hi,
On 05/03/14 11:04, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
Again I'm not against it, I like and use a lot Git, but I'd prefer deciding
on clear facts rather than just committers' preferences (mine included).
I completely agree with you. and that's why I opened this discussion
thread. My reasons are (and might not been shared/agreed by others) the
following ones:
* performance, specially in the ASF's svn setup
* simpler format, so repair is easy and corruption is rare
* real branching management with frictionless switch
* better branch auditing and merge events
* option for new workflows not possible now, particularly on
topic branches with a mid-long term life
* more effective (private) forking
On the other, it comes with a prize: svn is very simple and you may be
used to it, while with git you'd need to learn new processes (and
commands). And of course that's something to take into account too.
Regarding the ASF tools, there is a minor inconvenience: Apache CMS
currently does not support git, so the web site's source code would keep
managed by svn.
I just want to add a quote by Andrew Morton I always found funny when he
introduced Linus Torvalds in a talk about git at Google quite long ago:
"Git is expressly designed to make you feel less intelligent than you
thought you were." But don't worry, it just takes a while to get your
confidence back ;-)
Cheers,
--
Sergio Fernández
Senior Researcher
Knowledge and Media Technologies
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
Jakob-Haringer-Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T: +43 662 2288 318 | M: +43 660 2747 925
sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at
http://www.salzburgresearch.at
