On 4/27/07, Brad Hards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 27 April 2007 04:52, Jeff Muizelaar wrote: > So what do people, especially Albert, think? Now that 302 is merged > (thanks Albert) we have time to do less constructive things like argue > about which SCM to use :) I'd prefer subversion, just because I'm already familiar with it. Not familiar with git, and I don't see decentralised as that big an advantage.
(Apologies for yet another bad car analogy) I think that's a common position if you never tried git. But there's a difference between, say, buying a car, where you can pick and choose only the features you want because you're going to drive it, and selecting an SCM, where you'll just be one of several developers using the tool. The point I'm trying to make is that git can work in a centralized mode just as well as svn, and if you don't care about the decentralized features of git, just pretend they're not there. Even if you don't need the features, there's no need to prevent others from benefitting from disconnected commits, local history browsing, local, cheap branches and all that. And just to clarify, git can be used in a number of ways. In the kernel community everybody has his own little tree and everybody merges back and forth. That's chaotic and confusing, and if this is what people think of when they think about a decentralized SCM I can understand the resistance. What we're going to do in case we move poppler to git is to set up a central repository on git.freedesktop.org, and everybody who now has CVS commit access will be able to push their changes into that repository. Kristian _______________________________________________ poppler mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
