From: Stephen Haberman Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 22:07:21 +0000 (-0500) Subject: Notes from awhile ago. X-Git-Url: http://git.droids-corp.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=0affac639e4c5753a9cad2634c24f12d8b92e88b;p=git-central.git Notes from awhile ago. --- diff --git a/VsSubversion.markdown b/VsSubversion.markdown new file mode 100644 index 0000000..37aca3a --- /dev/null +++ b/VsSubversion.markdown @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ + +Svn +=== + + * pro: Monotic rev numbers (though commitnumbers is better as they don't change with the whole repo) + * pro: Cherry picking doesn't duplicate the commit + * pro: Good/faster trac integration + * pro: Inherently flattened branches (requires branch.name.rebase+pending preservemerges--or `pull`) + * con: allows anti-social change hoarding of one large commit + * con: lots of .svn meta folders (slows down Eclipse) + * con: looses data in rename+merge scenario + * con: allows pushing from an out-of-date working copy as long as specific files don't conflict + +Git +=== + + * pro: index (easier to break up commits, see only conflicts during merging) + * pro: stash (or local WIP on multiple branches without separate working copies) + * pro: local commits + * pro: combined diffs in gitk and commit emails + * pro: "git diff" in conflicted merges only shows conflicts, not what merged cleanly + * pro: safe merging (working copy is not munged, always have ORIG_HEAD or reflog) + * pro: pre-filled-in merge commit messages (e.g. with what conflicted) + * pro: DAG visualization (gitk) + * pro: just one .git meta folder + * con: requires flags/prefer-rebase script to maintain flattened branches + * con: allows anti-social change hoarding of many small commits + * con: no good tattoo (fixed with commitnumbers) + * con: trac integration is slow +