Excerpts from Avery Pennarun's message of Tue Jan 12 14:01:42 -0500 2010:
> If what you want is just one shared working copy with locking, then
> what you want is RCS. Why change what's not broken? You're not doing
> anything distributed or even any branching, and you don't need to
> atomically commit multiple files at once (which would be very
> confusing if more than one person is changing stuff in the current
> tree), so git doesn't seem buy you anything.
I would like to respectfully disagree. I want to use git because:
* I use Git on a regular basis, and do not use RCS. I constantly
have to go digging through the manpages when I occasionally do
stumble upon an RCS system. Interface familiarity is nice.
* Putting it in Git means that you can easily grow; you can decide
"Hey, maybe we want to do branchy development" and just do it,
rather than have to drum up the activation energy to do an
rcsimport.
* If code is deployed in a production context as a Git checkout,
you can definitely have both branchy development as well as
a shared working copy (with low contention, but contention nonetheless).
Cheers,
Edward
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html