[sf-perl] Perl Migrates To the Git Version Control System (fwd)

Quinn Weaver quinn at fairpath.com
Mon Jan 5 14:44:39 PST 2009

On Mon, Jan 05, 2009 at 11:38:36AM -0800, yary wrote:
> I'm a subversion fan and have yet to check out git. That said-
> [...]
> I think the difference is with git, the "branches" are not part of the
> central repository. The not-so-committed committer, the "leaf nodes",
> the larger set of developers who are working on some part they're
> personally interested in and who do not yet have the trust of the
> core, can still have the luxury of committing/version control for
> their personal project.

Can someone who's a git guru please comment on this?

I'm in the process of switching to git from monotone (the last, GPL'ed system
Linus tried before throwing up his hands and writing git).  I won't go into
detail on mtn, but, in normal usage, the server tracks the entire history of
*any branches that you have (or have had)* and *any personal checkpoint-type
commits you've made*.  Same for all other developers who sync with the server.
The server knows all.  In fact, when you sync or pull from the server, your
client knows all, and you can work in offline mode with the whole history at
your fingertips.  Of course, you can still work on a branch without fear of
breaking the main line of development.  It's wonderful.

I think it's really valuable that the mtn server tracks all branches past and
present, and all commits offline or on-.  Does git do the same thing?

I could find this out the hard way, but I'm just sticking my toes in the git
stream and I'd love to hear from someone more experienced before diving in.
If you're that person, thanks!

PS: If you're interested in the history of how Linus's love and hate for mtn
inspired him to write git, see http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/4/8/9 and
http://lwn.net/Articles/249460/ .

Quinn Weaver
Full-stack web consultant
quinn at fairpath.com
510-520-5217 (mobile)

More information about the SanFrancisco-pm mailing list