Timeline for What does SVN do better than Git?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 25, 2013 at 23:23 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Copy edited. |
| Nov 17, 2013 at 6:33 | comment | added | mcdowella | I work in a software company that does a lot of small projects - a dozen people would be a large project - with informal code ownership. We get a lot of value out of having a backed up version controlled system to make sure disk crashes don't lose data, and now and then we go back N versions to see when bugs appeared. We don't need more advanced features often enough to learn them. We moved sccs -> SourceSafe -> SVN + tortoiseSVN and at each step we got obvious improvements for little or no cost to learn the new system. The time to learn git might not pay off for us. | |
| Nov 17, 2012 at 18:53 | comment | added | Wyatt Barnett | @naught101 -- fair point. On the other hand you've got hg which can do pretty much everything git can and doesn't required advanced degrees in command line-fu to get anywhere while also working very seamlessly cross-platform. | |
| Nov 17, 2012 at 0:46 | comment | added | naught101 | @WyattBarnett: Git isn't designed to make everyone feel stupid. Just CVCS users. Linus Tovald's long-winded and sometimes arrogant explanation of the road to git is quite enlightening, as long as you allow that he's actually attacking a technology, and not a group of people. | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 12:29 | comment | added | Wyatt Barnett | I'm sure you could figure out a way to handle multiple random filesystem trees in the same project. I also suspect that would take a bit of time and effort. Out of the box SVN lets you check in things at various levels in a central tree. This is a perfect fit for some applications and teams. Which isn't to say that git isn't a perfect fit for other applications and teams. | |
| Sep 1, 2012 at 6:29 | comment | added | WarrenT | Do you not decide which files to add to the index? So why can't you version your random file trees? | |
| Aug 31, 2012 at 0:26 | comment | added | Wyatt Barnett | @WarrenT : funnily enough, I've managed a successful transition to HG with this team. DCVS concepts are not that tricky once you get past the gate I'll admit. But you can't get past the "git is designed to make you feel stupid" angle nor the "git don't quite want to work on windows naively" issue. Finally, it still doesn't handle the "I just want to version some random file trees in a central repo" story at all. | |
| Aug 30, 2012 at 23:44 | comment | added | WarrenT | The reasons given in this answer also read almost exactly like the spoof Top 10: Why Subversion is better than Git. From a Git perspective, this simply demonstrates you don't understand the Git approach as well as you think. | |
| Aug 30, 2012 at 23:13 | comment | added | WarrenT | Easily grokked is highly subjective, and is largely based on how you try to fit the new knowledge into what you already may know. It also makes a great deal of difference what your source of learning is. If you are going by man pages, good luck. If you are being taught by a good teacher who already groks it, you've got it made. I found git made tremendous sense after watching several good videos on YouTube. If you get your understanding from someone who has already distilled it down to the simple core, then anything is easier to understand. | |
| Oct 1, 2011 at 15:32 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by sje397 | ||
| Sep 30, 2011 at 12:19 | comment | added | Peter Taylor | @maple_shaft, and sometimes they aren't. snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 12:14 | comment | added | maple_shaft♦ | @jhocking New ways aren't always the best for every circumstance. It brings to mind the old story about NASA spending millions of dollars developing a pen that can write in 0g. The cosmonauts on the other hand made due with pencils. Sometimes the old ways are better, NOW GET OFF MY LAWN! | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 12:10 | comment | added | Joachim Sauer | @jhocking: I don't love SVN, but if someone tells me "I don't like these new DVCS things, so I'll stay with CVS", then I'll definitely recommend it: it's the easy road to at least partially sane VCS ;-) | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 11:58 | comment | added | jhocking | Being easier to grok is an important advantage, since that makes it more likely to be used. SVN is certainly way better than no version control, and if someone is stubborn about old ways then maybe SVN is the best choice for them. | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 11:29 | history | answered | Wyatt Barnett | CC BY-SA 3.0 |