From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: Why's Git called Git ? Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:33:33 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <013001c69f04$ae4e2400$0200a8c0@amd2500> <001001c6a06d$6e7b94b0$0200a8c0@AMD2500> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 05 21:34:03 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FyD8J-0005v7-GA for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:33:59 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965002AbWGETdx (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2006 15:33:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965003AbWGETdx (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2006 15:33:53 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:31433 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965002AbWGETdw (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2006 15:33:52 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1FyD81-0005sl-6l for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:33:41 +0200 Received: from host-81-190-27-124.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.27.124]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:33:41 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-27-124.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jul 2006 21:33:41 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-27-124.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Aaron Gray wrote: > Anyway good going, I am glad Linux has an open source VCS again now. > > I do not know how BitKeeper are going to fell knowing they have been > replaced by a Git :) > > I am toying with using a VCS for a set of related projects, either CVS > because its well known, SubVersion for ease of use, or Git as it is new. > Lots to descide upon, any pointers would be appreciated. CVS is showing it's age; mainly the fact that IIRC it began as a series of scripts over RCS, file level version control system, extending version control to sets of files, somewhat. Branching in CVS is serious PITA. Renaming _with_ retaining full and correct history: forget about it. Subversion is "better CVS": still centralized, CVS infernal branching replaced by "cheap copy" branching. Well known, replaces CVS thorough OSS projects. Git, Mercurial, Monotone, Bazaar-NG, Darcs are new brand of distributed VCS. I really like notion of branching in Git; but be warned about tracking and not recording renames, and the need of explicit packing (the latter very minor). Powerfull, perhaps too powerfull for newbie user: but that is what Cogito is for (although now Git contains fairly large set of high-level commands). http://git.or.cz/ http://git.or.cz/gitwiki http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/Git and "Other version control software" at http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitLinks P.S. If you decide to use Git as VCS for your project, consider adding entry about it on http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitProjects wiki page. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git (at FreeNode)