I can't see this working out poorly for the pro-SVN people one way or the other. If you'd probably be better off with git, you should use git - but svn will cer

I can't see this working out poorly for the pro-SVN people one way or the other. If you'd probably be better off with git, you should use git - but svn will certainly prove workable enough in the same situation. On the other hand, if you'd be better off with svn, most likely due to its locking functionality, by comparison git is very likely to prove painful enough to warrant a switch. Ideally this will cement SVN's position in its niche. Most git users seem to deny that this niche even exists, but I think it is there. I see SVN's more natural competitor as Perforce (which currently beats SVN as handily as git does, though from the opposite direction), but its maintainers seem not to be bothering to take it on, presumably due to their perception of SVN's position in the marketplace. Were they to admit that it's lost to git on what has become git's home turf, which it seems that they're doing, perhaps this would help focus attention elsewhere...