User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

mercurial?

mercurial?

Posted Jun 24, 2013 21:31 UTC (Mon) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
In reply to: mercurial? by dskoll
Parent article: Subversion 1.8.0 released

Recall how I'm using SVN: as a repository for non-technical people to check in documents and have them in centralized version control.

You mean they don't need to know about histories of their files? Why are you using such a complex tools as SVN, GIT, etc? Simple network share should suffice.

We're not using any of the advanced features of SVN

GIT-SVN is fundamentally incapable of keeping correct SVN history (just a recent example). Worse: it usually works and it's very easy not to notice a problem when you commit your file. But later, when you'll try to use SVN for the forensic work (this is what VCS is used for, right?) you'll find out that history of your project is scrambled up.

none of my coworkers even notices that I use git svn instead of svn directly.

Sure. For them the end result looks like a work of madman who copies files around randomly and changes them for no apparent reason. You can create something like this with SVN client, obviously, but in that case history is usually looks saner.


(Log in to post comments)

mercurial?

Posted Jun 25, 2013 7:48 UTC (Tue) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

> You mean they don't need to know about histories of their files?

Even if *they* don't want to know, other people like him probably do.

It's quite frequent to have to force "non-technical" people to use version control. Worse, you'll even find some people still refusing to see the value of it even after using it for a long time.

Git is the very last solution you want to this type of problem.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds