Meeting: Tuesday 27th July
Jan Henning Thorsen
jhthorsen at cpan.org
Fri Jul 30 06:50:16 PDT 2010
I personally and @work only use git (don't care if it's a one man
show, the whole world or a team at work). It simply is a lot better:
branching, merging, rebasing... From what I know, svn doesn't have any
concept of rebasing, which imo kick ass :-)
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:38 AM, Tom Hukins <tom at eborcom.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:25:47AM +0100, Peter Edwards wrote:
>> I think Subversion works better for a small team in one place than
>> git. As soon as you have remote workers, though, or more branching
>> then I think git makes more sense.
> As one of my colleagues puts it, "Subversion has excellent branching
> support, but it sucks at merging". Of course, you usually want to
> merge a branch back in at some point.
> We've encountered various problems such as changing a file to a
> symlink that have made us generally wary of Subversion. Admittedly,
> I've happily used it in other environments and encountered fewer
> problems due to simpler working practices.
> I deliberately mentioned distributed version controls generally rather
> than git specifically, as we like monotonic revision numbers, which
> git does not support.
> MiltonKeynes-pm mailing list
> MiltonKeynes-pm at pm.org
More information about the MiltonKeynes-pm