3 ms·
git was wildly successful, yes, but it still has hints of what esr was talking about. once you step out of the clone/checkout/commit/push loop, git is extremely
by nunez 3y ago
git was wildly successful, yes, but it still has hints of what esr was talking about. once you step out of the clone/checkout/commit/push loop, git is extremely thorny for people who aren't "with it."
- inglor_cz 3y agoWhere I program, we still use subversion and, looking at the costs of migration, we decided not to move to git. The time and effort needed for that migration just couldn't be justified.
- JohnFen 3y agoI wish that my employer would ditch git and go back to subversion. The use of git is a source of unending problems.
- treadmill 3y agoCare to explain a few?
- JohnFen 3y agoMost of the problems fall into two categories: merging and branching, both of which have repeatedly led to angst and strife to various degrees. There's also the problem of squashing leading to a loss of historical data, and we can't seem to get people to stop squashing. Subversion results in far fewer problems in these areas. Given that, in our use case, git brings nothing that subversion doesn't, I would greatly prefer to use the system that leads to less issues and greater productivity. Please note that I'm not saying that git is bad in some kind of overarching sense. It just brings trouble in our use case.