Edward Diener
On 1/27/2011 12:52 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
Independent of modularization, ryppl, or anything else, is it time to start a discussion on the main list about moving to Git?
I hope such a discussion entails a very strong justification of why Git is better than Subversion. I still do not buy it, and only find Git more complicated and harder to use than Subversion with little advantage. I fear very much an "emperor's new clothes" situation where everyone is jumping on a bandwagon, because it is the latest thing to do, but no one is bothering to explain why this latest thing has any value to Boost.
Indeed. Also, why git rather than another DVCS such as Mercurial or bazaar? Personally, I find Mercurial much easier to use than git, and it has the same major advantages (which are essentially common to all DVCS systems). Also, Mercurial works better on Windows than git does in my experience --- the git port for Windows is relatively recent, whereas Mercurial has supported Windows for a while. Since many of the boost developers use Windows I would have thought this was an important consideration. I haven't any personal experience of bazaar, so don't know how it fares in this regard. The chief advantage of a DVCS over subversion is that you can do local development with full version control (including history) whilst offline, and then push/pull when online. Also, you can do incremental local commits, so you have the advantage of VC, without pushing unfinished changes to the main repository. Branching and merging tends to be easier too. Anthony -- Author of C++ Concurrency in Action http://www.stdthread.co.uk/book/ just::thread C++0x thread library http://www.stdthread.co.uk Just Software Solutions Ltd http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk 15 Carrallack Mews, St Just, Cornwall, TR19 7UL, UK. Company No. 5478976