On 6/14/07, Igor2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am not against using git, but I need to protect SVN here. One needs to > see both the adventages and the drawbacks. > > With git, I will need to worry about disk space, because checking out a > repository will download and store much more than an SVN (or > CVS) client. If I'm an active developer, it may be a good idea, having my > own history, but if I'm only an user interested in the latest revision, > this may be a pain. Especially if I don't have 160 gig disks. Of course, > with newer git versions there may be a way to get the latest release only > using extra command line arguments, but an "svn co > svn://something.org/project/trunk" may be simpler for users than a long > command line. I am not sure (yet) how git works, does the same happen > with updates? Can I use an "svn up" type command and only have the latest > revision and no local copy of the whole history?
I don't think git can do this... because git is implemented in a distributed point of view and this was made to make it easier for the developers to keep their work while without internet connection or whatever. > > The other important point is the distributed vs. server-client > approach. Everyone having his own repository is really nice because more > develoeprs can start experimenting with the code and they can share their > modifications easier. However, the "boring" server-client setup with > it's centralized approach can send an email or irc message on any commit > to a mailing list so developers see what other developers are working on > in a branch. The repository is usually hosted on a high bandwith server so > everyone can get the files fast. The serve may have a stable network > connection and high uptime. Comparing this to having to connect a random > developers home computer behind an adsl fo a specific branch has > drawbacks. Or if the developer pushes (?) his branch to a central server, > we are back at client-server approach. Or does git have a trick for this > as well? git can do that also... you just need to give execution rights to the sample post-commit hook script. If you checkout the mailing list MM-commits (related to the linux-2.6-mm tree maintained by Andrew Morton) you'll see every single commit is posted on that mailing list. git works like this... you clone a repository... work on that repository... commit your changes locally and then you git-format-patch your changes and after that you git-send-email all the patches to the mailing list... on the central server side, the maintainer just git-am the mbox file with all the patches in it... Of course you can push... but the only one who can push directly to the central server is the maintainer himself... > > People usually say that svn is centralized and you can not work offline > for long because you can't save little commits. Of course, with vanilla > svn it's true. However, there are ways to change this, for example svk, so > one can have a distributed svn. > > Finally, I think it's a good idea to keep read-only CVS mirror if the > project moves to git (or anything else). Even if it moves to git you can export git commits to svn or cvs commits using a simple command, this way would be easy to keep a mirror in cvs. -- Best Regards, Felipe Balbi [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ geda-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-dev
