From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Grimm Subject: Re: git for subversion users Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:25:21 -0700 Message-ID: <4680A341.5000208@midwinter.com> References: <46809733.2060200@vilain.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Sam Vilain , git@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick Doyle X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 26 07:25:21 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I33YF-0008HB-5G for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:25:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753978AbXFZFZF (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:25:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752863AbXFZFZF (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:25:05 -0400 Received: from 91.86.32.216.static.reverse.layeredtech.com ([216.32.86.91]:43763 "HELO midwinter.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753962AbXFZFZD (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2007 01:25:03 -0400 Received: (qmail 15637 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2007 05:25:01 -0000 Received: from c-76-21-17-123.hsd1.ca.comcast.net (HELO pinklady.local) (koreth@76.21.17.123) by tater.midwinter.com with SMTP; 26 Jun 2007 05:25:01 -0000 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (Macintosh/20070604) In-Reply-To: <46809733.2060200@vilain.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Sam Vilain wrote: > If svn is still the master there should be no difference to the way you > normally collaborate development using Subversion. The central server > is still the publishing point for trunk, however many release > engineering branches you use, and feature branches. It's only if you > want to start mixing groups of people, some working with subversion, and > other people using git-svn and merging between each other at the git > level, that you can start getting confused. They can safely operate at > the patch trading level though. > I can vouch for all of that as well. On some of my repositories I use git solely as a fancy Subversion client, no interaction with any other git repositories. And hardly anyone at my company even knows about it; as far as they are concerned I just check stuff into the svn repository like any other engineer. But on a few of my repositories I do things like use git to keep a copy of my work in progress synced up between my laptop and my development server, or (rarely) share my work with another git-aware developer. In those cases I do have to be kind of careful what I do, mostly around making sure all the repositories are in agreement about which branches come from where and about when I use rebase vs. merge vs. squash merge. I will say, though, that the upcoming addition to git-svn to allow merges to be directly committed to the svn repository will make some of those kinds of scenarios a lot less brittle than they are now. It's still a work in progress but it looks very promising so far. (Search the list for "[PATCH] git-svn: allow dcommit to retain local merge information" if you want to see what I'm talking about.) -Steve