Timeline for What does SVN do better than Git?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 25, 2013 at 23:25 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Copy edited. Added some context. |
| Mar 10, 2012 at 13:28 | comment | added | user1249 | Git takes "git init" to set up. Done. | |
| Oct 1, 2011 at 15:32 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by sje397 | ||
| Sep 30, 2011 at 19:22 | comment | added | Mark Booth | @Spencer - Here I was addressing maple-shafts issue with git being too much, as I assumed you were. Incidentally, fossil's distributed bug tracking & wiki sound interesting. Very useful if your customer doesn't have constant net access, but you still want them to submit timely bug reports. (Since this is chatty, I'll delete this when I'm sure it's been read) | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 14:34 | comment | added | Spencer Rathbun | @MarkBooth As stated in the original question, I think it's a matter of wants and needs. At my current workplace, there was no repo before I got there. I needed something that had all, or most, the project tools I wanted wrapped together, was easy to use, kept everything instead of deltas, and would work distributed for teams of 1 or 2 people across multiple machines. | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 13:16 | comment | added | Mark Booth | @Spencer - Contrariwise, as a user of both git and hg, I would suggest mercurial for anyone who thinks git is too much. TortoiseHG would be very familiar to anyone used to TortoiseSVN (it even shares the same Explorer overlays on Windows). It's certainly a lot easier than VSS and I would be surprised if it took more than a few seconds to set up an hg repo, commit the initial state and clone it to a shared drive. | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 12:46 | comment | added | maple_shaft♦ | @SpencerRathbun, Thanks! I will have to take a look at that. It is not so much that I love svn as I have a distaste for git. | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 12:39 | comment | added | doug | let's not sound the alarm at the slightest possibility of controversy. Important topics are often the most controversial and the ones most likely to invoke strongly held views. So "This kind of question" is important and the possibility of an out-of-bounds response is not a plausible to not post it. I assume the users on this Site are adults. What's more the way my Q was phrased, was if not neutral, then deferential to subversion folks--responsive answers to my Q will have to recite advantages of subversion over git, not the other way around. | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 12:39 | comment | added | Spencer Rathbun | Really? Then I'd suggest you have a look at fossil. | |
| Sep 30, 2011 at 11:35 | history | answered | maple_shaft♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |