THANK YOU SO MUCH Keeto! And also thank you for your moo tutorials! :) I thought I was a quite experienced mootools programmer before... ;)
On 5 Dic, 12:13, Keeto Obcena <[email protected]> wrote: > You're right--this is not the right place for questions like that. > > That being said, might as well answer your questions.. > > First things first: Git and Mercurial are different beasts. You'll see > them clumped together in most cases because they're both "distributed > version control systems." To put it simply, the main difference > between these kinds of VCS and the non-distributed ones like SVN is > that with a distributed vcs, each copy is a full repo. (you can find > out more about that by reading up). Git and Hg share similar concepts, > but they have different interfaces and philosophies, so they're quite > different. With that in mind, I'm gonna answer your questions from a > Git point of view, since it's what we use. > > Short answer: no, Git doesn't care about the top-level folder. Unlike > SVN, Git only creates one 'internal' folder for the whole repo, which > is '.git' and is found at the root of your repo. When the containing > folder changes (renamed, moved, etc.), Git will still work, because > the internal folder is unmoved, and because like I said above, each > clone of a git repository (aka, each copy/clone of the initial repo), > is a full git repo on its own (i.e: you can commit, push, pull and > clone from a working copy). > > Another important difference: Git doesn't track files, it tracks the > *content* of files. Say you have a file in your repo called 'one.txt' > and you deleted that file, replaced it with another file of the same > name and exact same contents. Other vcs will bark at you, because > they're tracking the file itself. But Git won't care--as long as the > files have the same content, Git treats them as the same file. > > As for speed concerns, your mileage may vary, although it might speed > you up in some places. No matter what vcs you're using, the initial > cloning will always be slow for big repos because you're downloading > the whole history and all associated files. In the case of Git though, > it's gonna be slightly faster because it doesn't litter your whole > repo with internal folders (no '.git' folders everywhere, just one-- > unlike .svn) and in most cases, you'll be using the Git transfer > protocol which is designed for efficiency. > > Another speed boost in terms of workflow would be commits--since > commits are done locally before pushing them to your main repo. You'll > find yourself committing stuff more often (and that's a great thing) > and them pushing all of your commits at once, shaving off a lot of > time in the transfer process. Best of all, branching and merging are > easier in Git. Torvalds designed Git to make these things waaaay > easier than SVN (Linus hates CVS and SVN with a passion shamed only by > his loathing of C++). > > Finally, if you're choosing between Git and Mercurial, then you're not > gonna commit big mistakes. Both are great systems and both have big, > helpful communities to back them up. Git has Github and Mercurial has, > err, BitBucket. Git is written in C and Mercurial is in Python. > They're both fast, but Git excels in branching and merging (and it has > its own transfer protocol that speeds things up). > > Good luck. > > K.Ohttp://keetology.com/ > > On Dec 5, 5:19 pm, stratboy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi! I know this is not the right place for questions like this. I try > > anyway :) > > > I'm totally new to version control. I'm trying subversion. The main > > (maybe the only one) thing I don't like is that if I rename a > > repository or a direcotry containing the repo, then my working copy > > can't commit changes anymore. The same if I rename a working copy. > > So, I see mootools uses Git. Does Git have the same renaming/moving > > problems? And Mercurial? Is there any versioning system that let you > > do that? > > > Another little question: I'm a programmer and a designer as well. So > > my project folders often are quite big. And subversion is really slow > > in importing them and creating a working copy. So is git better in > > this? And Mercurial? > > > I read the docs of git and mercurial but I'm not able to desume this > > kind of info. > > > Thanks for any help
