[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Much is said about how git does merging better than cvs or svn.
I'm wondering *why* it is better.
Did someone recently invented a better merging algorithm??
Why can't cvs and svn just replace merging code to say
they are now "just as good as git" ???
Chris
I don't know if it is or it isn't. However, given the history of Git, I
think the question is moot: Git was written by Linus for the specific
purpose of making his life easier in maintaining the *Linux kernel*. He
has said he doesn't care if it doesn't work for anyone else, or if it
works for any other projects. He wrote for himself.
That others choose the use Git on their projects and then complain that
it doesn't work as well as something else, is like me complaining that
that stupid ratchet wrench someone came up with is useless for working
on my plumbing.
So, maybe Git is not better at merging than CVS or SVN - unless you're
Linux Torvalds and your only project is the Linux kernel.
--
Best Regards,
~DJA.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
