Re: Why's Git called Git ?

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 5, 2006, 19:33 UTC
Message-ID: <e8h466$o4$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <001001c6a06d$6e7b94b0$0200a8c0@AMD2500>

Aaron Gray wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> 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)