Re: Git vs SVN
Eddy Petrișor wrote:
(Sorry for the previous top-posts, I sent them from my phone while
didn't let me see that there was a quote)
2008/11/6 Richard Hartmann <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 00:50, Eddy Petrișor <email@example.com> wrote:
Still, it seems to me it would make more sense to prefer git since it
allows more flexibility and is more powerful (think offline work,
contributions, full source in repository, easier backporting, patch
transplant, less disk space used)
On the other hand, a git client can work with a svn server. The reverse
is not true. Always two sides to a coin ;)
Yes, but you can't use (easily) an incomplete repo like we use for our
packages in SVN, with git to easily do builds, edit patches etc.
So my point is that using SVN for a package kills the distributed
model that git svn would offer since you still need to do some
non-trivial hacking to make bulds, patches, anyhting else that is
facilitated by svn-buildpackage.
Well I have yet to find it "easy" but I'm a moron. :)
Sure, but if we as a "team" decide it is the direction we want to go,
I'd rather begin to go that way now.
I am not suggesting Barry should pick either, mind. He does the work,
Of course he decides.