4 ms·
The author is misguided about (1) the technical details behind Git (all commits are hashed, so if you cryptographically sign a particular commit tag, it will de
by ezyang 15y ago
The author is misguided about (1) the technical details behind Git (all commits are hashed, so if you cryptographically sign a particular commit tag, it will definitely point to that commit and its attendant history), as well as (2) the obvious/non-obviousness of a rewritten history (if upstream rebases, it's really obvious.)
- mainguy 15y agoYou're absolutely right, that was kinda the point of the article. I've run across quite a few people who think git is "distributed svn" and the gap between these two tools is much bigger than most appreciate.