On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Lee Henson<[email protected]> wrote: > > 2009/8/19 Stuart Laughlin <[email protected]> >> >> (frankly I find the experience rather sucky on Windows), > > Which bits? >
The tooling, primarily. I've been using TSVN heavily for about five years, so I admit my bias. Probably my biggest gripe is that my Git Bash window is only useful for git, so I always have to keep two console windows open, one for git, one for .Net tools (and everything else). Also the inability to commit empty folders is annoying, but that's a nit. On the bright side, I do enjoy having bash on Windows (I'm a linux bigot). :) As an aside, before getting enchanted by github, I was leaning toward bzr for DVCS. Github is completely awesome (though I reckon it could just as easily be Bzrhub). >> I still think SVN is the best tool for 'internal' / 'corporate' >> development, but I've come to the conclusion that the DVCS tools are >> far superior for OSS projects. > > I use git for "internal" and oss work. All the advantages of a dvcs apply to > non-oss work too, surely? Which bits of slow/always connected/awkward > merging work well for businesses? :) > I'm of the opinion that the 'non-linear' approach to development is needlessly complex for 'internal' work. SVN is neither slow nor always connected, and SVN handles the sorts of merges I perform just fine. We don't get too fancy: tag the milestones, branch for bugfixes and for spikes, trunk is for next version. I encounter virtually zero friction or pain with SVN for 'internal' development (and lots of friction and pain with OSS development!). --Stuart --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino Tools Dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
