Re: GIT vs Other: Need argument

From: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 17, 2007, 14:39 UTC
Message-ID: <81b0412b0704170739te4c35f0m8e4a3cd5bad440cd@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90704170333t38992792m77ddb3d927b21842@mail.gmail.com>

On 4/17/07, Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

>
>  - Old school SCMs allow you to branch, but are unable to keep track
> of merges in any meaningful way. Every time you merge, history is
> lost. GIT (and other DSCMs) have excellent branching _and_ merging
> facilities.
>

This one was a bad argument too. Curiously, and I cannot explain why, ability to branch is considered a weakness of GIT ("because it confuses the integrators", them being old mean men). The Perforce is said to be "vastly superior to everything" on these grounds: "it also has branching support, but luckily(!) it is hard enough for simple developers. Was not their (Perforce's) fault, they just included it to keep up with the market". Almost exact wording (I had to translate it).