On 4/26/2014 07:27, Andrey Repin wrote: > This is exactly what makes me dislike it strongly. This, and idiotic model of > copying whole repository to my machine, when I only want to glance at the > source code, and find the culprit of my current issues. > I've spent 3 hours downloading a 200Mb repo of a project, where the Subversion > client pulled 4 or 5Mb HEAD of it in like 10 minutes, once I realized what an > idiotic weight I pulled and went to google to see if it can be done better. > And "fine control" doesn't mix with "project consistency" at all. > Subversion is aimed at versioning of a whole project, in a supposedly > consistent state at each version. What can be more "fine" than this, is beyond > my understanding.
git clone --depth 1 if you don't care about history. > You can still commit separate files from working copy, though, but this > practice is discouraged for the greater good of the project you develop. > Don't you need to git add individual files to mark for commit? Won't you get into the same problems if you forgot to commit files in SVN?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature