3 ms·

Yes, yes, absolutely. I've looked at history going back 10+ years (at least). Many times. Two-year-old commits I consider to be fairly recent. I can't remember

by astura 7y ago

Yes, yes, absolutely. I've looked at history going back 10+ years (at least). Many times. Two-year-old commits I consider to be fairly recent. I can't remember a specific reason why off the top of my head, but it was usually something to do with looking at the context around why some piece of code existed. The companies I've worked for also require commit messages to contain bug tracking IDs, which can provide further context. There's also really not much of a reason to migrate from svn to git if svn is still working for your organization. Whenever the topic has come up previously in my workplaces it ended with "nah, svn is still working fine for us." OTOH I was involved in a migration from CVS to SVN because of limitations/problems with CVS.

usrusr 7y ago
> There's also really not much of a reason to migrate from svn to git if svn is still working for your organization. But also not much reason against, given the quality of migration tools. The toughest nut to crack is the absence of that handy incrementing version counter.
- oaiey 7y ago
  The issue with the migration is the references (commit IDs) and the fact that branching best practices differ dramatically.
  - kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
    But merging is not a half-baked shitshow.
Marsymars 7y ago
> There's also really not much of a reason to migrate from svn to git if svn is still working for your organization. Attraction to new devs. I'm new enough (past decade) to software development that I've only used git/mercurial, and joining a company that required using svn would give me serious pause.
- thewebcount 7y ago
  It shouldn't. I've switched version control systems probably a dozen times over the years. There are common features, and of course, unique syntax to each of them. But once you understand how one works, it's not usually too difficult to use others at least at a basic level of getting changes and committing changes.

by astura 7y ago

usrusr 7y ago

> There's also really not much of a reason to migrate from svn to git if svn is still working for your organization. But also not much reason against, given the quality of migration tools. The toughest nut to crack is the absence of that handy incrementing version counter.

oaiey 7y ago
The issue with the migration is the references (commit IDs) and the fact that branching best practices differ dramatically.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  But merging is not a half-baked shitshow.

Marsymars 7y ago

> There's also really not much of a reason to migrate from svn to git if svn is still working for your organization. Attraction to new devs. I'm new enough (past decade) to software development that I've only used git/mercurial, and joining a company that required using svn would give me serious pause.

thewebcount 7y ago
It shouldn't. I've switched version control systems probably a dozen times over the years. There are common features, and of course, unique syntax to each of them. But once you understand how one works, it's not usually too difficult to use others at least at a basic level of getting changes and committing changes.