On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Except that it can't be merely wire protocol. They're remapping the
> commit, copy, delete, move,branch, tag, and merge operations of one
> source control into the other. That's..... not directly comparable,
> especially the tag operation, which is really designed to be much more
> locked down than Subversion has by default. In theory, I suppose you
> could lock it down to emulate the git "thou shalt not touch me" model.
>
> And unfortunately, there are Subversion usage models that simply don't
> map well to the standard trunk/branches/tags layout, such as matching
> simultaneous tags for source code and/or binaries of multiple parallel
> projects in the same repository.
Just because there are use cases that you can see that it doesn't
cover doesn't mean it's not useful for someone. In this particular
case it's like complaining that a bicycle isn't very useful in getting
across the Atlantic and using that as an argument that nobody should
make bicycles.
I'm not going to bother responding to this thread further. It really
has no place on the dev_at_subversion.apache.org or
users_at_subversion.apache.org list as Brane has wisely pointed out.
Received on 2012-09-21 05:56:21 CEST