Why Subversion is better than Git
Written by James Bailey Wednesday, 10 February 2010 13:44
I think it's fairly safe to say that amongst developers, the SVN Vs. Git argument has been raging for some time now, with everyone having their own view on which is better. This was even brought up in the of the questions during our Webinar on Subversion in 2010 and Beyond.
Hyrum Wright, our Director of Open Source and the President for the Subversion Corporation talks about the differences between Subversion and Git, along with other Distributed Version Control Systems (DVCS).
He also talks about the upcoming changes in Subversion, such as Working Copy Next Generation (WC-NG), which he believes will cause a number of Git users to convert back to Subversion.
Have a watch of his video and let us know what you think by either commenting on this blog, or by posting in our forums. Registration is simple and will only take a moment!
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Andreas Krey, February 10, 2010
Why, exactly, should WC-NG not be a similar blunder? Why shouldn't someone who is annoyed by all the .svn dirs just use git-svn? (Quite possibly there will usable externals support in git-svn before WC-NG is out.)
In my view the top priority should be to get merging to just work, as it does in git. And then a not-completely-slow wire protocol to the server.
Subversion does have a few features that git doesn't and can't but they are neither in usability nor in VCS functionality.
Kudos for removing those 'terms of use', though, otherwise I wouldn't have posted here.
-
- +7
-
-
written by Julio Aguilar, February 11, 2010
-
- +1
-
-
written by trans, February 11, 2010
Keep up the good work.
-
- -1
-
-
written by James Bailey, February 11, 2010
I should probably start off by pointing out that the blog title and content is merely my own (non-developer) perspective, rather than Hyrums thoughts themselves (which you can see on the video offering a comparison of the two systems).
Certainly, the title was prevocative, aimed to instill debate on a topic which is happily discussed by many, many developers and I'm very happy to see that some of that discussion has founds its way to this site.
I fully understand and appreciate that Git is more suitable to a number of you in the same that that Subversion will be for others. We want to see this debate and bring together both DVCS and Subversion users together to discuss the benefits and fall downs between the various systems and if there's something that you want to see in Subversion or you think that Subversion could do something better - say so in the forums! We have a number of Subversion Committers contributing towards this site and I know that they also would like to see your views.
So, take a moment to go and express yourselves, either here (as some of you have done) or start a discussion in our forums - we want to hear your views!
James
-
- -3
-
-
Dude, I don't even know where to start with you. Sure, being a bit more mature, well that comes with age, but that's not like some inherent advantage you "earned", it just happens, with age, you know, like wrinkles or death.
Yay, local commits! err, wait a minute, you think that's pretty much the biggest reason why we use Mercurial or Git? Sure, it's nice and all. But... what about solid merging, patch queues, gitweb/hgweb, bitbucket/github, bundling of changesets, importing of changesets, bundling of patches, importing of patches, patch queue revisioning, NON RELIANCE ON LDAP for webhosting, pushing AND pulling, not just up and down but also sideways, hg serve (instant serving), switchable branches, cloning instead of branching for tryouts also from local copies, good configuration files, efficient and unobstrusive data management, etc. etc. etc.
Information density in 4 minutes 39 seconds of your video around 0.4 to 0.6 informations/minute, motivational factor near 0. Advice, keep playing that catchup game, priceless.