Re: svn versus git

From: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
Date: Dec 14, 2006, 22:07 UTC
Message-ID: <4581CB38.8050401@op5.se>
In-Reply-To: <200612142000.54409.arekm@maven.pl>

Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Wednesday 13 December 2006 23:00, Andy Parkins wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> With all the discussion about user interface difficulties, I started to
>> write a comparison with subversion document.  (I was assuming that people
>> find subversion easy).  As much as I love git, I was expecting to find that
>> it's hard to use interface would have subversion as the clear winner.  I
>> was hoping that would then give guidance as to what could be fixed in git.
>>
>> I was surprised, therefore, to find that in each case I was finding that
>> git was the winner.
> 
> subversion is a winner when it comes to options handling (especially --help) 
> and better (error) messages. That's one of reason why people find it easy.
>

Yup. Most discussions about what git can do to improve usually ends up in a patch that fixes either documentation or error- / help-messages.

> ps. I'm blind or there is no documentation about what utilities are needed to 
> get git fully working? (like sed, coreutils, grep, rcs package (merge tool 
> afaik needed)...). 
>

perl and the standard coreutils, which afaik are required to be present on all unix systems. We no longer require external merge tools.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se