|
Avenging Dentist posted:Answer: don't use SVN if you care about branching a lot. More correct answer: don't use SVN if you care about merging after branching. Why you would branch without merging I guess is an exercise left to the reader.
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2009 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 17:30 |
|
|
Can't you run a soft update and get the list of files that way? Also why do you want automated builds to run flawlessly on uncontrolled environments? If people are polluting the checkouts, cleanliness isn't something you can guarantee, right? Or you want a workflow that's equivalent to making a fresh checkout and then applying a local modification atop it and trying to build that, but without the cost of an entire checkout?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2009 16:49
|
|
|
git = good for decentralized; good for merging svn = good for centralized; windows integration via tortoise; good for naive merging I would recommend SVN if your case.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2010 17:36
|
|
|
Lysidas posted:Hell, this happened a few pages ago in this thread. At the time, I wasn't as experienced with Git and I hadn't yet Seen The Light. Now that I have, I'm an enormous jackass to anyone who suggests starting from scratch with Subversion. I'm concerned that this is me now since I initially recommended Subversion and I have zero experience with Git. Just going off of gut and old initial reactions of Git when tool support was still very fresh. Times have since changed, obviously. I'm not opposed to learning Git, but I just have no impetus to! My office uses Subversion and I know with our "schedule" and calibur Git would be out of the question. And, I don't have the cycles or motivation to take up an open source project that uses Git.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2010 21:30
|
|