Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?

Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Steve Ramsey (steve_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-21 00:46:28

On Mar 20, 2012, at 8:40 PM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 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.

For what it’s worth, here is a series of articles that sold me on DVCS (and Mercurial in particular, though that’s neither here nor there) after spending quite some time wondering whether to bother:

        <http://hginit.com/>

It’s a typically breezy Joel Spolsky piece, but it does cover use cases nicely.

                        Steve