3 ms·

"is that there are a set of high-level version control operations that you’d expect git to be able to handle in simple cases without a lot of fuss." True. git

by ivenkys 16y ago

"is that there are a set of high-level version control operations that you’d expect git to be able to handle in simple cases without a lot of fuss." True. git is a "particular kind of" swiss knife of Version Control - tonnes of options, not all of them intuitive but extremely powerful and useful if you like to work in the git way. I, for one am a bit surprised about all this noise on workflows of Version Control , you use what you think is best suited to you and your team. Its as useful as a language war , not all languages are equal but you use what suits your use-case and what you are most comfortable with. End of.

lincolnq 16y ago
The reason language and version control wars exist is because these are the mechanisms by which developers interoperate. It is worthwhile for me to convince you to use Git instead of Subversion, or Python instead of C++, because I might one day work with you and have to use your tools. If there's consensus about what the best tools are, then I am less likely to experience pain when moving. If we were talking about which editor to use, I am rarely bound to use a certain editor based on the team I'm on, so that's why editor wars are, indeed, largely noise.
- ivenkys 16y ago
  "I might one day work with you and have to use your tools. If there's consensus about what the best tools are, then I am less likely to experience pain when moving." Your point though correct in the abstract misses one crucial piece of information . Is it the best tool for the job i.e. it is not simply enough to say Use git or Python or <foo> etc. The context around it is very important. For e.g. in my current team everyone is comfortable using git as we have a largely de-centralised development model. On the other hand in my previous role it was a very centralised - one true copy of source code model - hence SVN. The comparisons and wars that come out are devoid of this context and just say , i use this and therefore you should do. My point is that there is no one true way and attempting to posit that even though interesting is largely futile.
  - lincolnq 16y ago
    When we get to the point where two tools have legitimate, reasonable tradeoffs, then I agree with you. However, your example isn't a good one because Subversion has serious deficiencies and Git works perfectly well in a centralized model. (Just "bless" one repo on a server and have everyone push to it.) I can't think of a single use-case where Subversion is a preferred way to solve the version control problem.
    - ivenkys 16y ago
      "I can't think of a single use-case where Subversion is a preferred way to solve the version control problem". Developer expertise. My point is not that Subversion is a better VCS than git , it is not. I am a big fan of git and will use it everywhere i can but i don;t get to make the decision to choose the "right" VCS every time , sometimes you end up in places where there are factors other than technical merit at play. However, i think we are discussing a point orthogonal to the main topic at hand.

by ivenkys 16y ago

lincolnq 16y ago

The reason language and version control wars exist is because these are the mechanisms by which developers interoperate. It is worthwhile for me to convince you to use Git instead of Subversion, or Python instead of C++, because I might one day work with you and have to use your tools. If there's consensus about what the best tools are, then I am less likely to experience pain when moving. If we were talking about which editor to use, I am rarely bound to use a certain editor based on the team I'm on, so that's why editor wars are, indeed, largely noise.

ivenkys 16y ago
"I might one day work with you and have to use your tools. If there's consensus about what the best tools are, then I am less likely to experience pain when moving." Your point though correct in the abstract misses one crucial piece of information . Is it the best tool for the job i.e. it is not simply enough to say Use git or Python or <foo> etc. The context around it is very important. For e.g. in my current team everyone is comfortable using git as we have a largely de-centralised development model. On the other hand in my previous role it was a very centralised - one true copy of source code model - hence SVN. The comparisons and wars that come out are devoid of this context and just say , i use this and therefore you should do. My point is that there is no one true way and attempting to posit that even though interesting is largely futile.
- lincolnq 16y ago
  When we get to the point where two tools have legitimate, reasonable tradeoffs, then I agree with you. However, your example isn't a good one because Subversion has serious deficiencies and Git works perfectly well in a centralized model. (Just "bless" one repo on a server and have everyone push to it.) I can't think of a single use-case where Subversion is a preferred way to solve the version control problem.
  - ivenkys 16y ago
    "I can't think of a single use-case where Subversion is a preferred way to solve the version control problem". Developer expertise. My point is not that Subversion is a better VCS than git , it is not. I am a big fan of git and will use it everywhere i can but i don;t get to make the decision to choose the "right" VCS every time , sometimes you end up in places where there are factors other than technical merit at play. However, i think we are discussing a point orthogonal to the main topic at hand.