5 ms·

Such as? Then why has everyone switched to git? (Hint, because it is fundamentally built on more powerful ideas than what came before it)

emodendroket 9y ago
Well clearly not "everyone" has since we're apparently talking about a company that hasn't.
joshuamorton 9y ago
Open source has moved to git, mostly because being standardized on one vcs made it easier for people to contribute. A lot of companies don't use git.
- davidgay 9y ago
  No, before git the standard was svn, and before that, cvs. The switches happened even though there was an existing standard.
  - progre 9y ago
    Having worked with all three, nothing but Stockholm syndrome would keep anyone to switch from cvs. Likevise the switch to git for open source happend (In my opinion) in large part because Github offers a far better experience than SourceForge witch was dominant at the time.
    - boulos 9y ago
      There was actually a brief period where Google Code was ascendant, but then GitHub was demonstrably investing more in collaboration. I think one aspect of Git that is really important is forking, and having your own local commits. Merging commits and patches in svn were awful. You wouldn't ever allow someone random to join your svn repo, but if they can reasonably provide a patch, you could take it. Git makes that massively easier.
      - TheArcane 9y ago
        >There was actually a brief period where Google Code was ascendant, brrrr
      - alphaalpha101 9y ago
        >I think one aspect of Git that is really important is forking, and having your own local commits. Do you mean branching? Git doesn't have any concept of forking. What GitHub calls 'forking' isn't forking at all.
kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
People switched to Git because Svn merging continues to suck and branching and tagging are implemented in the most inane way possible.
- Const-me 9y ago
  I didn't care about merging and tagging. For me the main feature was distributed nature. SVN is OK on a gigabit corporate LAN with dedicated people to manage & maintain the servers + network. Anything less than that, and it becomes slow and unreliable.

emodendroket 9y ago

Well clearly not "everyone" has since we're apparently talking about a company that hasn't.

joshuamorton 9y ago

Open source has moved to git, mostly because being standardized on one vcs made it easier for people to contribute. A lot of companies don't use git.

davidgay 9y ago
No, before git the standard was svn, and before that, cvs. The switches happened even though there was an existing standard.
- progre 9y ago
  Having worked with all three, nothing but Stockholm syndrome would keep anyone to switch from cvs. Likevise the switch to git for open source happend (In my opinion) in large part because Github offers a far better experience than SourceForge witch was dominant at the time.
  - boulos 9y ago
    There was actually a brief period where Google Code was ascendant, but then GitHub was demonstrably investing more in collaboration. I think one aspect of Git that is really important is forking, and having your own local commits. Merging commits and patches in svn were awful. You wouldn't ever allow someone random to join your svn repo, but if they can reasonably provide a patch, you could take it. Git makes that massively easier.
    - TheArcane 9y ago
      >There was actually a brief period where Google Code was ascendant, brrrr
    - alphaalpha101 9y ago
      >I think one aspect of Git that is really important is forking, and having your own local commits. Do you mean branching? Git doesn't have any concept of forking. What GitHub calls 'forking' isn't forking at all.

kevin_thibedeau 9y ago

People switched to Git because Svn merging continues to suck and branching and tagging are implemented in the most inane way possible.

Const-me 9y ago
I didn't care about merging and tagging. For me the main feature was distributed nature. SVN is OK on a gigabit corporate LAN with dedicated people to manage & maintain the servers + network. Anything less than that, and it becomes slow and unreliable.