Hey Quinn and Georga, I would argue the economical thing is not too important once git gains some critical mass. It's still small compared to svn, and in a way the compete with Mercurial which is pretty populair too.
A bigger problem would be the licensing as we can't include the Git source without open sourcing our own app due to the GPL license. There are ways around this (wrapping command line) but this generally results in a lesser quality app. - Koen On Jul 26, 5:38 am, curiousgeorge <cardena...@gmail.com> wrote: > Good point Quinn. > > I'll pose the question, how much would a person be willing to pay for > having a Git App that is of the same quality of Versions? > I'll pay another 39 pounds for a Git client app. Who wouldn't? > > I think Git support would be feature for a paid upgrade to Versions > (if they wish to support both svn and git) IMHO. > > GitX is nice for commits and reviews...that's it. Same with GitNub > (if not less). The other clients are just not....well, they are > not Versions let me put it that way. > > Pico, Sofa....name your price for either a paid upgrade for Git > support in Versions or an app dedicated for Git...I know I'll fork > over the dough. > > On Jul 25, 4:09 pm, Quinn Taylor <quinntay...@mac.com> wrote: > > > > > Not gonna happen — there are already threads on this. The paradigms of > > centralized and decentralized version controls systems are radically > > different, and there's not a good way to represent both in the same app. > > > Look at GitX (http://gitx.frim.nl) for a nice OS X client for git. > > > From an economical standpoint, it would not be smart to support git > > in Versions, either — users always want more for free, but it costs to > > develop features, and the cost would either have to be passed on to > > buyers (increased price, and/or paid upgrade for existing users, both > > of which are bad options) or eaten by the developers, essentially as a > > gamble that the added features will draw enough new purchases to > > offset the cost. Neither is a good idea. > > > Further, those of us who only use SVN would rather that SVN bugs and > > enhancements get patched, rather than having the developers devote > > countless hours to adding git support. > > > - Quinn > > > On Jul 24, 2009, at 2:19 AM, frebro wrote: > > > > Would it be possible for Versions to support both Git and Svn > > > repositories? It would be nice to be able to collect all repos in the > > > same app regardless of protocol. > > > smime.p7s > > 3KViewDownload --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Versions" group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
