Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?

Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-20 20:41:13

On 3/20/2012 7:03 AM, Julian Gonggrijp wrote:
... snip
>
> Well, allow me to present some fair reasoning to you.
>
> With regard to git versus svn: I think enough fair reasons have been
> given why git (or a DVCS in general) is better than svn. I'm not
> going to repeat those arguments here.

I have never heard a single technical argument, in all the endless 
mentions of Git among the people riding that bandwagon, why Git is 
better than SVN, or even why any DVCS is better than a centralized SCCS. 
I consider this whole move to Git and/or DVCS among "hip" programmers 
little more than a move to conform with what others are doing and feel 
"cool".

I am perfectly willing to read well-chosen technical arguments but not 
from people already sold on one side or the other. But I really despair 
of anyone being able to present such arguments in the atmosphere created 
by Git fanatics and DVCS fanatics. The only thing I have gotten from all 
this is "I've tried it, I like it, and therefore its superior".

Feel free, anyone, to point me to a purely technical discussion, 
article, whatnot, explaining the practical reasons why using a DVCS, or 
Git, is more productive and more pleasurable than using a centralized 
SCCS like Subversion.