Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Martin Geisler (mg_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-25 10:37:05

Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On 3/24/2012 2:20 PM, Martin Geisler wrote:
>> Edward Diener<eldiener_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> snip...
>>> You can't update or commit without access to an SVN repository, but
>>> this has nothing to do with restricting access to any part of an SVN
>>> repository, which is a no-brainer in SVN.
>> I think the point was that SVN requires you to work with a branch in
>> the central repository. A DVCS allows (but doesn't require) you to
>> work with a branch that you keep local and truly private.
>> You're suggesting that this can be done with SVN too by creating the
>> branch in the central repository and then restricting read and write
>> access to it? Yes -- that is possible, but it's not a natural way to
>> work with SVN.
> This depends purely on how you work. I have worked in places where the
> SVN repository was setup to section off who could work with what on
> the same repository or different repositories.

I'm not saying this cannot be done. I'm saying that you need extra
infrastructure to pull it off (smarts scripts, a good sysadmin, etc).

> There is nothing NOT natural in this and saying that "it's not a
> natural way to work with SVN" shows a clear bias.

I'm a Mercurial developer and consultant -- so I have obviously bought
into the idea of DVCS. I have not tried to hide that.

What I have tried to do is to explain the advantages of DVCS in general.
There seemed to be some confusion about what you can and cannot do with
DVCS and I wanted to help clear it up.

Martin Geisler
Mercurial links:

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at