|
|
|
|
|
|
by angelbob
5993 days ago
|
|
|
Git is significantly more complicated to learn, basically because having an additional level of repository and no default upstream repository makes for more moving parts. Git also has more flavors of branch (tracking or non) and repository (bare or not), and more ways to edit changes (cherrypicking, rebasing). So basically, more moving parts means it takes more time to figure it out. For you or me, that's an inconvenience and then happiness about all the cool features and capabilities. For a corporation trying to keep their training budget low, that's a non-starter. |
|
|
Use the default.
> and repository (bare or not)
Use the default.
> more ways to edit changes (cherrypicking, rebasing)
Use the same ones you use in svn.
> more moving parts
git has four object types that are put together very naturally (tags contain commits which each contain a reference to a parent commit and a tree which contains a collection of other trees and blobs).
This means that when something goes wrong, I can fix it.
svn has at least two server-side object formats, and various version changes that make some features available or not based on client and server capabilities.
Backups are harder, repair is harder, history traversal is harder, sending changes around is at the very least slower.
In my experience, interacting with git is no harder. I've taught many people how to use it and the only people who were remotely confused were those with a svn background, as the svn unlearning process generally takes more time than the git learning process.