Re: VCS comparison table

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Oct 27, 2006, 02:08 UTC
Message-ID: <20061027020842.GZ20017@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <200610270202.k9R22Wxf004208@laptop13.inf.utfsm.cl>

Dear diary, on Fri, Oct 27, 2006 at 04:02:32AM CEST, I got a letter where "Horst H. von Brand" <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> said that...

Show 8 quoted lines

> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 7. Checkouts (as a noun). This probably read "Support Centralized and
> > Disconnected Centralized Workflow" but that is perhaps too wordy. Git would
> > have "No" for "Centralized"
> 
> Why? We could all agree that some repository is "central" and all push/pull
> there. Or send patches by mail (or apply them via ssh). Sure, it's not CVS,
> but...

An ability to configure the tool so that the centralized workflow is _enforced_ may be important for managers. It's stupid, but it's what is meant there, I think.

Show 5 quoted lines

> > 19. Ease of Use. Hmmm... I don't know for Git. I personally find it very
> > easy to use, but I have not much experiences with other SCM. I wonder why
> > Bazaar has "No" there...
> 
> Extremely subjective. Easy to learn doesn't cut it either.

I don't think this column makes sense at all. I swear I've seen *several* people that claimed GNU Arch was easy to learn/use for them!