|
Er, no.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
I cannot agree with that. I've been using TFS for the past 6 mths, and while I found it to be great Application Development Lifecycle tool, when it comes to the source control, SVN is far superior IMHO.
Initially I thought it is just a matter of getting used to the tool and I should give it a chance. After months of experience, I still reckon that common things like branching, merging, blaming, comparing revisions (changesets) or even committing is simpler and more intuitive in SVN.
|
|
|
|
|
Powerful tool. With power comes responsibility.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
I could say the same thing about a pneumatic drill, but it doesn't mean I want to use one!
|
|
|
|
|
No, but if you do, you'd better understand how it works...
Decentralised configuration management systems are not trivial (centralised neither, but state-of-the-art now). Plus if you do not need the decentralized way, you may use it as a plain normal centralized version as well.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: Decentralised configuration management systems...
Presumably that was a misstatement.
Rage wrote: Plus if you do not need the decentralized way, you may use it as a plain normal centralized version as well.
Doesn't alter the fact that is missing a primary feature for anything above a small company - that of management of multiple products where there are non-trivial code dependencies between them.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: Presumably that was a misstatement.
How that ? No, dfinitely Distributed/Decentralised Configuration Management System.
jschell wrote: here there are non-trivial code dependencies between them
Define "non trivial" ? DCMS can do everything what a normal CMS can do, so either what you are trying to achieve is not feasible with centralised configuration management, or your code structure was not made up properly.
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: No, dfinitely Distributed/Decentralised Configuration Management System.
Because that isn't what Git is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_management#Overview[^]
Rage wrote: Define "non trivial" ? DCMS can do everything what a normal CMS...
If we are talking about Git then it does not have a mechanism for dealing with independent deliverables which share code (not other deliverables) because each repository is optimized for dealing with a single deliverable. This works well for open source internet projects. It doesn't work for a company with different product lines because the end up kludging solutions either with multiple repositories or a single repository.
Other source control systems do.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: Because that isn't what Git is
Source control is one part of configuration management. To be precise, since this is what you are after, let's call it a distributed version control system instead of configuration management system, even if one can argue a version control system in software development can handle about everything required by configuration management.
jschell wrote: If we are talking about Git then it does not have a mechanism for dealing with independent deliverables which share code
Still do not understand what Git cannot do. How would you do that with Subversions ? Or ClearCase ? or SourceSafe ? or Vault ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
Rage wrote: Source control is one part of configuration management
Yes - so git is one part of configuration management.
Rage wrote: Still do not understand what Git cannot do. How would you do that with Subversions
I can manage (check out, version, etc) only one directory under a tree of directories in Subversion.
Git requires multiple repositories for the same ability.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure. Let's drive a Panzer VI instead of a car. More power, more responsibility. Heil Git.
|
|
|
|
|
But can it get from Berlin to Warsaw on one tank of fuel?
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Allow me to bring my modest contribution.
(CEF build excerpt)
$ git svn find-rev r251746
_
Oh, I forgot to say: this was started 2 hours ago. Thanks, I have my Ctrl/C.
|
|
|
|
|
Most useful post I've read today. I was under the impression that GIT cured all source control ills, and I was some sort of luddite for not knowing anything about it.
Now I know everyone despises it I will let it bother me no more.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Chalk up one for not despising it here.
I've been using it for the past few months and there's definitely a fairly steep learning curve if you've never used a DVCS before.
It certainly has some quirks and annoyances, but as I get used to things I see the benefits. I think the key is finding a workflow that works for what you're doing.
I generally use SourceTree as a GUI, which is pretty good, and fall back to the command line when doing some things that aren't supported (interactive rebase being the primary one)
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I have little issue with Git.
But I just knew that someone would come along and tell everybody the difficulty was their own fault.
How nauseatingly immature that is, and how self-destructive. Trying to defend, blindly, a piece of software against a chorus of criticism, developer criticism at that, shows total disregard for the end user and I for one would never show any interest in adopting products created by people like that.
Did I already mention I have no problem with Git?
|
|
|
|
|
We are moving to Git where I work and this thread is not giving me any warm fuzzies.
|
|
|
|
|
The only time I used Git I had to type like 10 commands to be sure that I got the right branch, this coupled with the lack of a fully functioning GUI made me switch to TFS.
|
|
|
|
|
GIT is a great tool… in the same way that an advanced CNC milling machine is a great tool. If you’re working in a very specialized environment, with highly skilled craftspeople that are well-trained and understand how to properly use – and what the dangers are – of such a tool, then it is the appropriate tool for that environment.
That environment is most likely producing specialized items; prototypes, one-off’s, uniquely difficult items to fabricate, or have other special needs (the machine shop at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory comes to mind).
I’ll admit, a CNC milling machine is pretty cool… I’ve used (and accidently abused) them. But when my task was to quickly drill a hole, I didn’t want to waste time trying to set up that complex machine when a simple drill press – or even hand drill – would do the job more quickly and safely.
In fact, if you need to quickly and safely attach part A to part B, you don’t want a CNC milling machine, you want a power screwdriver; maybe one with torque settings, speed control, and a few other simple, self-obvious features. It’s going to let you focus on your job of attaching the parts together and moving on to the next task. Something like Subversion or the myriad of other source control systems that aren’t so cool but do their job of managing source, and allow me, as a developer, to intuitively check out, update, merge, diff, and check in source code.
So if you’re developing something specialized, like the Linux kernel, or have a relatively small team of highly distributed people whom you can afford to train (and pay accordingly), then by all means you should consider GIT. That is the environment and skill level the tool was developed for. But if your focus on writing software, with teams of developers at a various skill levels, and you want them to focus their time and effort on developing the software business solutions that make your company money, then GIT is most likely not the appropriate solution, no matter how “cool” folks say it is.
BTW, we are a small, start-up, who hastily chose GIT because “everyone is going to it”. After a year, no one in the organization is comfortable with it, most of the developers don’t trust it because we have all managed to destroy work by doing “what seemed intuitive”, and it's a decision we all regret.
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is great ! 
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Entropy isn't what it used to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Article[^]
Gee, I can think of a few more. 
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Too much time. Way too much time is what some people have.
|
|
|
|
|
and way too much funding.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
