"Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > It _will_ be a bit of an apple-to-oranges comparison, but you could > use a few large-ish projects that have a published GIT gateway. > ... > - cvs status vs git status This _is_ apples and oranges. git status is not about "the current status of working tree" but about "what I would commit if I were to say git-commit at this moment". "cvs status" does a lot more, I think. Also I haven't met anybody who says "cvs status" is useful; people seem to use "cvs -q update -n" often when they want to know "what's different between me and upstream"? > - cvs update vs git pull While that is a valid comparison, I think CVS users use "cvs update" (especially "cvs -q update -n" variant) far more frequently for the purpose of seeing "what did I change so far" than truly try to update from the upstream. So a comparison that has more real-life significance would be "cvs -q update -n" vs "git diff --name-status HEAD". There are a handful more. - "git pull -n" vs "cvs up" when your tree is clean and you are a dozen revs behind. - "cvs co -rother-branch" vs "git checkout other-branch". - "cvs diff -rold-version" vs "git diff old-version". - "git am a-dozen-of-mails" vs its cvs equivalent. - "git rebase a-dozen-of-commits" vs its cvs equivalent. - "git log path/to/directory/" vs its cvs equivalent - 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
