On 2007-08-18 03:04:20 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > git-svn makes it possible for me to keep the mess that is git to
> > myself, and only expose others to the _results_ of my work with
> > it.
>
> Very well put. It is not just svn but I privately use git on top of
> cvs managed project for exactly this reason.
I use git (and git-svn, and StGIT) on top of our Subversion repository
at work for this reason too: git lets me rewrite recent history until
it's pretty, while svn considers history totally immutable (barring a
dump+filter+reload of the whole (central) repository).
However, I object to the insinuation (in David's post, if not yours)
that "history in git is a mess" because it's mutable. git lets you set
the policy for each of your branches: either allow history editing (to
be able to fix embarrassing mistakes), or don't (to let people rely on
history to not change under their feet). This is strictly better than
Subversion, which forces you to adopt the latter policy.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
-
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
