3 ms·
I thought SVN was great, easy to use, and very intuitive, that is until you had any merge conflicts. At the time, it worked very well for our small team, I ima
by WatchDog 2y ago
I thought SVN was great, easy to use, and very intuitive, that is until you had any merge conflicts.
At the time, it worked very well for our small team, I imagine it would work less well for large teams on a single codebase.
I miss having a commit serial number.
- ahartmetz 2y agoI used kdiff3 and could never understand people complaining so much about SVN merges. Now I use kdiff3 in Git and it's fine, too. What isn't fine (though occasionally improving) is Git's UI and mess of termnology and concepts.
- WatchDog 2y agoIt's been a long time since I used it, I don't remember what I was using for diffs, but I suspect it was just whatever the default built in diff support was. It occurs to me that many people these days use git with github exclusively, and have it configured to only allow commits via PR, and only allow either squash or rebase merges, it's kinda SVN with extra steps.
- globular-toast 2y agoYou have to sacrifice the serial number to get a distributed system. Well worth it IMO. But if you really wanted you could tag every commit on master with the next number (should be easy to do with a hook).