Edward -- Edward Diener <eldiener@tropicsoft.com> writes:
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. [...], but no one is bothering to explain why this latest thing has any value to Boost.
For my own development efforts, I've found Git to be an improvement over Subversion in the following ways: 1. Detached development. The ability to do incremental check-ins without requiring a network connection is a huge win for me. 2. Data backup. If every developer (more, every developer's computer) has a full copy of the history on it, that is more distributed and easier to obtain than making sure you have transaction-perfect replication of your master SVN repository. (Or, at least, it was for me.) 3. Experimentation. In my experience, branching is cheaper and much lighter-weight in Git than in SVN. I do sympathize with the "harder than svn" complaint; I find it so myself. But having been left out in the cold a few times by having only SVN, I will certainly run my next project with git rather than svn. Also, it's not clear that Boost has the same level of contributor fan-in that is git's truest strength. Regards, Tony