Re: [boost] DCVS vs CVS: call for constructivism

Subject: Re: [boost] DCVS vs CVS: call for constructivism
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-26 18:15:08

On 3/26/2012 4:37 AM, Philippe Vaucher wrote:
>>
>> What is "far from ideal (if not horrible)" about the current situation
>> with Boost and SVN ? Please be specific.
>>
>
> I think the discussions have shown that it's hard to be specific and
> convincing about this topic, but see the list of pros/cons I made in my
> original post and also the posts from Beman and Julian.
>
> You won't find individual points where DCVS seem to really
> outperform/outfeature the classic CVS, but together as a whole it really
> makes a difference for a lot of people. I agree that "horrible" is probably
> too far streched, sorry for that... but I think the current situation
> frustrates people, and it eventually gets on their nerves.

This is my point about the move from a CVS like SVN to a DVCS like Git ( 
or Mercurial ). I really do not understand the necessity for it based on 
use cases which are causing people to feel that a change should be made.

I do hear general reasons why some people are more comfortable with a 
DVCS but since switching is going to cause me to have to learn a new set 
of techniques for working with version control and Boost libraries, 
while I am already quite comfortable with the current SVN system and its 
capabilities, you can understand why I do not see the reason for having 
to make this change.

Simply saying that X is better because of some general reasons, which do 
not apply IMO to actual usage. does not make me want to do something 
different in programming and programming tools.