At Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:01:23 +0000,
Rick Moynihan wrote:
>
> 2009/11/4 Adam Spiers <[email protected]>:
> >
> > I disagree - I think using git with a centralized model provides the
> > best of both worlds: simplicity but also all the nice benefits of
> > decentralization such as offline commit and history access,
> > intelligent merging etc. Lots of people do it this way, e.g.
> >
> > http://feeding.cloud.geek.nz/2008/12/setting-up-centralied-git-repository.html
>
> +10 :-)
[...]
>
> By comparison git is hassle free and far more robust. Though git is
> my preference using git, mercurial or bzr would always be preferable
> for me over SVN.
I agree as well. I gave up on SVN after having been bitten one too
many times. I will say, however, that although I use git [*] for
keeping my org-mode files in sync, for the central repository model, I
find that mercurial works better in that it's simpler to use.
However, mercurial and git are pretty much the same in this regard.
[*] Despite using mercurial for almost everything else, I use git and
not mercurial for org-mode as mercurial is not available on my maemo
Internet tablet....
_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
