[GLLUG] Subversion & Bug Tracking Panel

Jason Green jave27 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 2 11:17:29 EST 2007


On 3/2/07, Charles Ulrich <charles at idealso.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2007 18:38, Jason Green wrote:
> > svn is quite good for small or average size projects.
>
> Hmm. KDE, GNOME, GCC, and quite a few other high-profile OSS projects
> use SVN and they're generally considered large-sized projects. Are
> there certain types of projects that you wouldn't recommend SVN for?
> Just wondering since I'm not thoroughly familiar with the pros and cons
> of the various version control systems.

The biggest benefit of git is its ability to easily create a stack of
patches and then send them all in incremental pieces.  I believe SVN
has a similar capability, but from what I've heard, it's not quite as
nice.  Essentially, you make a small single change, then commit that
patch to your local source tree.  Then, you make another, and another,
...  When you've finally got it all working the way you like it, then
you can send the entire set of patches to the main patch-accepting
mailing list with a single command (it will integrate with IMAP
servers, or send in straight SMTP for you, etc.).

This way, your patches are distinct and easy to review instead of
being one giant blob of changes that makes it impossible for others to
comment on.  Like I said, I think SVN has a similar abliity, but I've
never used it personally.

Another strong point of git is that you can use its "cherry pick"
feature to maintain multiple source tree branches, then apply
individual patches between one branch and another fairly easily.

As far as Windows clients, there really aren't any good ones yet.  You
should be able to run the normal text-mode client via Cygwin or MinGW,
but I've not tried that.  There are utilities that create an automatic
git -> cvs gateway, so your non-git users can still access the
repository via cvs.


More information about the linux-user mailing list