Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-21 08:18:07
on Tue Mar 20 2012, Edward Diener <eldiener-AT-tropicsoft.com> wrote:
> 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".
Wait for Beman's talk at BoostCon/C++Now
(http://cppnow.org/session/moving-boost-to-git/). Beman is among the
last people I'd accuse of being preoccupied with what's "hip" and "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.
A purely technical discussion is unlikely to be able to give you much
insight into pleasure. The biologists are still trying to plumb the
depths of that one :-)
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com