Zoltán Németh wrote: > I strongly recommend git. it has several great advantages above cvs or > svn. for example, it does not store whole copies of the whole tree if > you make a branch, but stores only the differences. it is much faster, > and losing a commit is really hard even if you screw things up seriously > (I know I've done that a couple of times when I was new to git, but I > could manage to restore everything) Yeah git is definitely good, I don't deny that, but your comment about storing whole copies when you make a branch does not hold true for SVN, at least not with that statement... If you make a branch in SVN it is free. If you make changes on the branch then commit it and subsequently merge that branch back to the trunk/master/whatever *then* SVN will store your changes twice, whereas git is cleverererer. I think both have their advantages. For me, until Git integration into Trac it's a non-starter as I use Trac heavily to track tickets/bugs, time and view the repo etc. The other thing about git particularly for web projects that store multiple revisions of binary data (images etc.) is that the git-clone could end up taking up much more space than the SVN equiv. Due to the fact that a git clone is essentially a full copy of the whole repository, rather than just a "checkout" (SVN checkouts store twice as much as the raw data but that's a constant). I love both systems but for me, I find that web projects with graphics that have high churn are more suited to SVN but pure code projects (which can include web projects) where branching is done often then git wins hands down for features. My €0.02 :) Col -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
