4 ms·
Subversion would be the obvious choice, not git. The whole point of a DVCS is that it avoids having a canonical repo, whereas in science we very much want to ha
by lkrubner 8y ago
Subversion would be the obvious choice, not git. The whole point of a DVCS is that it avoids having a canonical repo, whereas in science we very much want to have a canonical version of the truth (otherwise there would be no such thing as fraud, if everyone is allowed their own version of the truth), and Subversion defaults to having a canonical version.
- bounder 8y agoI agree. As I said probably the tools and technology should be tailor for the specific use case of scientific papers. It would be nice however that these papers evolve online, instead of the written in stone papers that are publish today in scientific journals. A small note instructing the reader that a certain theory has been disproved or changed in the original paper would already help.