6 ms·
Subversion. It was made by CVS maintainers and a lot of care and thought was put into how it works and how the commands work and what the names of the commands
by cjensen 2y ago
Subversion. It was made by CVS maintainers and a lot of care and thought was put into how it works and how the commands work and what the names of the commands are. Subversion is limited in being an older model of version control where there is exactly one single source of truth.
In my mind Git solves a different problem that Linus Torvalds was facing: many people working in parallel with only some of the ideas pushed upstream, but many people wanting to make changes and easily being able to move forward to the latest changes from upstream.
My extremely opinionated view is that most people should use Subversion unless they have a very complicated team structure. And that means every solo dev working by themselves should not complicate their own lives by using Git unless they are really comfortable with it already.
- erik_seaberg 2y agoGit is well worth learning for any kind of collaboration or speculative work. It's fundamentally better at resolving merge conflicts, because it doesn't rely on being informed about which files may have been moved or copied. The Subversion maintainers owe me days of effort salvaging my small team's branches.
- tasuki 2y agoI have just the opposite view of yours! Subversion is so so complex. It requires a client and a server. It might have a nice UI, but its internals are a mess. Just the opposite of git! Why would a solo dev choose to use a client-server version control instead of one that works fully locally?
- cjensen 2y agoSubversion does not require a server :-) You can ask Subversion to create a repository anywhere you like in the filesystem.