Just to throw in (an admittedly external) $0.02: with Git, at least, *everyone* has a full copy of the repo, +/- local changes, so even a catastrophic failure of the apache Git servers would still allow a reconstruct of the repo elsewhere (say GitHub, or a different apache server). AFAIK, this isn't possible with SVN.
Derek On Jul 28, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Chris Burroughs wrote: > On 07/26/2012 02:43 PM, Joel Koshy wrote: >> +1 for git in general - however, the apache git mirror has been working >> pretty well for me for local work/code review. So if the caveats you >> mention are significant enough then maybe we should stay on svn? > > I think the caveats are of the "things *could* go wrong" variety, but > that current git users are happy and have not had recent problems. I > admit there isn't a good way to quantify that. -- Derek Chen-Becker Lead Infrastructure Engineer de...@precog.com 303-752-1700
