Daniel Cheng wrote: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Jano > <alejandro at mosteo.com> wrote: >> David 'Bombe' Roden wrote: >> >>> On Tuesday 01 July 2008 06:02:06 NextGen$ wrote: >>> >>>> We all agree that that merging things from branches back and forth is not >>>> easy with svn 1.4... but it will be easier when we will upgrade to a >>>> merge-tracking enabled version. >>> >>> In subversion it will always be a cludge, though, because subversion wasn't >>> designed with repeated merges in mind. >> >> Have you read the svn 1.5 release notes? You'd still call it a kludge? I'm >> honestly asking, I'd like to know from someone used to git. > > While I love using git, I am more interesting in DSCM then any > specific SCM. The ability of commit locally and work offline allow me > to test out my idea more freely. > You know, everybody have some crazy idea that he want to test without > letting others to see. > For instance, I have yet another experimental database and an > alternative location swapping code locally. > > A (good) side effect is the ability to work offline. > > Easy merge management is just a side effect of DSCM -- DSCM encourage > branching and forking. That's why every DSCM comes with a set of good > merging tools.
Well -- (leaving aside my unanswered question ;) ) -- I'm asking because for my own data (note -- not only code) I use svn, and merge tracking will be welcome. But I wonder what you (or `Bombe') consider a kludge and what not. Certainly I can see advantages to DSCM, but I don't feel for now a pressing need to move from svn for my non-collaborative needs.
