> 1) SVN will not detect a corruption - with Git the sha1 hash will > confirm that your source is unadulterated no matter who you pull it from. >
Applies to situation where there is more than one repo where to pull. AFAIK there isn't for Gambas. > 2) With SVN, all your eggs are in one basket - Linus does not (or need > to) back up the linux kernel because everyone has a copy. > Well, backups are something you have to do anyway. Unless everything important in you computer is on the git repo. I don't think so. 3) With Git branching and merging are really cheap and hence very fast - > SVN fosters long periods of lone worker activity (during which there is > no source code control) simply because merging is difficult and you do > not want to commit half baked fixes because of the repercussions to > other users by forcing more merges on them. > Maybe, I didn't get that far. > 4) With Git you can work on the source without having a connection to > the server and still remain protected by source control. > I didn't like how this source control was implemented, I find it extremely clumsy. > To me it works best through a good Gui client or when it is part of your > IDE (I am used to Jetbrains). But if you are a command-line junkie then > fill your boots. > I'm OK with both. Maybe some nice GUI would hide the complexity and make git great... sounds just quite a bit of work. Jussi ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want excitement? Manually upgrade your production database. When you want reliability, choose Perforce Perforce version control. Predictably reliable. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Gambas-user mailing list Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user
