[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: git vs. svn (again)



On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:53:49 +0200
Bruno Kleinert <fuddl@tauware.de> wrote:

> Am Freitag, den 11.09.2009, 15:57 +0100 schrieb Jon Dowland:
> > Last year Barry posted a question about whether we were
> > going to stick with svn or move to git:
> > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-games/2008/11/msg00010.html>
> > 
> > What I would like to ask is, which of the two should we
> > *encourage* the use of. I would suggest git for new
> > packages. It would be good to standardise on *encouraging*
> > one (not demanding nor migrating to it) for the purposes of
> > our wiki documentation.
> I'm with you, except, that I would *really strongly* encourage git and
> have Subversion as very, very optional option ;)
> 
> I think Subversion could be used by those who joined the team but are
> not familiar with a version control system, because I consider
> Subversion easier to learn and understand. But once familiar how
> things work, we should ask to switch over to git. That's simply my
> opinion.
> 
> Cheers - Fuddl

Being reasonably familiar with SVN/BZR, I find GIT to be an absolute
horror to learn (Its taking me ... some time). While I won't claim this
as absolute evidence, I suspect learning SVN then moving to GIT is
harder then simply learning GIT.
kk

-- 
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK5FOSS)
Debian contributor / gNewSense Maintainer
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: