Re: Subversion's do-everything-via-copying paradigm ( was RE: Re: Considering teaching plumbing to users harmful)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 7/17/08, Craig L. Ching <cching@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  Does it not bother you that renaming a file is a copy + delete [1].
>  Have they fixed that yet?  That was one of the biggest reasons we never
>  moved to subversion.

Perhaps you've confused CVS with subversion.

svn's handilng of renames is not as graceful as git's, but it does
work in the common cases.  For example, after the aforementioned
copy+delete, "svn blame" and "svn log" will still follow history back
through the rename.

Not sure how I ended up defending subversion on this list.  Somehow
I've been tricked into being on the losing side of this argument :)  I
guess I just wanted to balance the viewpoints a little; there are good
things to be learned from svn, but not things about branching,
merging, or rename tracking.

Have fun,

Avery
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux