From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Guilhem Bonnefille" Subject: Re: GIT vs Other: Need argument Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:08:07 +0200 Message-ID: <8b65902a0704181308i41c878ebi88c03a929769ba39@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070417104520.GB4946@moonlight.home> <8b65902a0704170841q64fe0828mdefe78963394a616@mail.gmail.com> <200704171818.28256.andyparkins@gmail.com> <20070417173007.GV2229@spearce.org> <462521C7.2050103@softax.com.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Johannes Schindelin" , "Marcin Kasperski" , git@vger.kernel.org To: "Linus Torvalds" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Apr 18 22:08:15 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 1HeGRq-0005R6-Vp for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:08:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753512AbXDRUIK (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:08:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753537AbXDRUIK (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:08:10 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.246]:26070 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753512AbXDRUII (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:08:08 -0400 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b33so348832ana for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:08:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Lt6lE7MuQomzW87OQQZLeTbdqvaj6J8SlTzhMn6ipEGW6nzcYWSiBHD3BdvnwzlR/Nugtd9yFShCJ25lzbYU5BEwsAneRAuoEC4MC4C9r4nCsN16JdGgkXj14YbM5JeZrhh6gViNqeRShvbA2p4rN2Ulei74Htr/9uUdTTRZ6aU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=hn82FUiaGK2qZeam9cbOvZWjbnZeTJX+kLIzvibC4Ke/E+Tdp0XQ6Ga52THVmhvEER49CYonk3YiEgacxZTjjVlcMipLKRPYkIXfJBprjXlnttJ1DjGxatxsHffymZCrjWygPn38RkHUtN3tB5+rUf/vQj3PZoZ2qcnH+W5YAEk= Received: by 10.100.124.5 with SMTP id w5mr700141anc.1176926887861; Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.100.44.7 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:08:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 4/18/07, Linus Torvalds wrote: > What _is_ true is that git is simply different from CVS. I don't think > it's necessarily harder to understand or use (in fact, I would argue that > git is a lot _easier_ to understand), but it is *different*, and it has a > ton more capabilities. Yes, but I think that, as Git has ton more capabilities, user has to understand more things than with CVS. I don't know lot of corporate teams, but here, our developers are REALLY not motivated by VCS. It's only a way to share work. And I'm not talking about concurrent modification: lot of people in my office really think that the better model is the locked one. These people won't be the guy who set up the repo. These people only expect a system to: - retrieve and merge the job done by other people - archive their job for other people. Nothing more. No interest for topic branches (they are simple minded ;-)), no interest for data integrity (it's "not their job"), interested in problem with connected system ("hey, CVS server is down, would you like a coffee while waiting IT detects that ?")... So for such people, I really think raw Git is much more complicated than CVS/SVN. -- Guilhem BONNEFILLE -=- #UIN: 15146515 JID: guyou@im.apinc.org MSN: guilhem_bonnefille@hotmail.com -=- mailto:guilhem.bonnefille@gmail.com -=- http://nathguil.free.fr/