[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: git is a lot better than SVN (???)

From: Saulius Grazulis <grazulis_at_akl.lt>
Date: 2005-08-17 13:56:24 CEST

On Tuesday 16 August 2005 03:10, Stefano Spinucci wrote:

> In the article "Linux: Using Git For More Than The
> Kernel" (http://kerneltrap.org/node/5557) Linus
> Torvalds says "...quite frankly, I think git is a lot
> better than CVS (or even SVN) by now...".

After your post, I have tired out GIT only to discover that it was not able to
put symlinks into the repository. Since we use symlinks extensively, this
"feature" makes GIT absolutely unsuitable for our needs. So far with being
better than Subversion...

Actually, of all Open Source version control systems, it seems that only
Subversion and Arch (tla) support symlinks. I have tried also OpenCM,
Monotone, Cogito/Git, Darcs, oh yes, and CVS ;). None of them accepted
symlinks :(. As for tla, it strikes as very complicated, and also refused to
accept my source tree with filenames starting with dot (like .something.d).

So, Subversion wins :).

Saulius Gražulis
Visuomeninė organizacija "Atviras Kodas Lietuvai"
P.Vileišio g. 18
LT-10306 Vilnius
Lietuva (Lithuania)
tel/fax:      (+370-5)-210 40 05
mobilus:      (+370-684)-49802, (+370-614)-36366

  • application/pgp-signature attachment: stored
Received on Wed Aug 17 14:08:37 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Users mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.