On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 11:18:35AM +1000, Brad Hards wrote: > On Saturday 28 April 2007 00:50, Kristian Høgsberg wrote: > > 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. > To paraphrase: "we want git, too bad". > > > 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. > How about svn and svk. Or svn with local git tools. You can get what you > want, > and I can get what I want.
What are your reasons for wanting svn? -Jeff _______________________________________________ poppler mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
