Re: GIT vs Other: Need argument

On 4/17/07, Pietro Mascagni [off-list ref] wrote:

So, in 15 seconds, how does one argue that GIT is vastly superior to
other version control software, especially CVS.

Adding some ammunition:

 - Old school SCMs allow you to branch, but are unable to keep track
of merges in any meaningful way. Every time you merge, history is
lost. GIT (and other DSCMs) have excellent branching _and_ merging
facilities.

 - Speed (try it on you project repo, or if the project is new, on a
repo sized to what you'd expectyour project to be).

 - Disconnected development. Checkouts on your laptop, continue
working when the server is down.

 - Extremely powerful and flexible if you are using the SCM to manage
the deployment.

 - Behaves transactionally, even when doing things like applying patches

 - Anon GIT is much easier to run (via http)

 - If the team is large, of for any reason the code needs review, you
can setup a tiered review/merge scheme like the linux team does --
instead of a shared repo, each developer has their own repos, and
integrators review and merge (or reject!).

 - Signed tags for releases

And yet... If the project ends up using CVS, you can setup your
cvs->git gateway. Even if you are always at the office, and just use
CVS most of the time, It's enormously useful to be able to call gitk,
use pickaxe, etc. And just by having those tools around your project
will probably benefit.

cheers,


martin