Re: [PLUG] Git: net time gain or loss?

[Fred Stluka <fred@bristle.com>]

JP,

In the past 36 years, I've used (in reverse chronological order):
- Git
- CVS
- PVCS (Polytron Version Control System)
- VSS (MS Visual Source Safe)
- rcs
- sccs
- VAX/VMS CMS

No experience with Hg or Bzr.  I went to Git from CVS and never
looked back.

--Fred
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred Stluka -- Bristle Software, Inc. -- http://bristle.com
#DontBeATrump -- Make America Honorable Again!
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 12/22/18 3:58 PM, JP Vossen wrote:
> On 12/22/18 1:41 AM, Fred Stluka wrote:
> > Right.  One of the things I love about Git is that a commit of multiple
> > files is atomic.  Before Git, every other VCS I used required me to
> > checkin each file separately.  So, if I changed multiple files as 
> > part of
> > a single bug fix or feature, it happened occasionally that someone
> > else would checkout while I was in the middle of my multiple checkins.
> > So they'd get part of my change, and things would fail. Sometimes
> > in weird unexpected and unrepeatable ways, so they could lose a lot
> > of time before it occurred to them to just do a fresh checkout to fix
> > it.  And of course, that fresh checkout was subject to the same race
> > condition with file updates from me and others, so it might not
> > work either.
> >
> > With Git, I "add" each file I change, staging them all to be part of
> > the next "commit".  Then I do an atomic commit, so anyone else
> > who pulls from the repo gets all of my changes or none.  Atomic
> > is critical here.  I railed against the lack of it for years, to lots of
> > people who often didn't even understand the problem, before I
> > finally moved to Git.  Ah...  Much better!...
>
> Fred, what did you use before Git?  All of the other DVCSs are atomic 
> too.
>
> CVS certainly had that non-atomic problem, and that drove me nuts.  
> RCS had it too, that's why CVS inherited it.  *The main* reason for 
> SVN to exist is to "do CVS better" and one of the first things they 
> fixed was that atomic problem.  OK, *everything* else they did was 
> really odd but...they fixed the atomic problem.
>
> Other than RCS/CVS I can't think of a major VCS that is not atomic. 
> Maybe there are some small players...
>
> Later,
> JP
> -- -------------------------------------------------------------------
> JP Vossen, CISSP | http://www.jpsdomain.org/ | http://bashcookbook.com/
> ___________________________________________________________________________ 
>
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group         -- http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements - 
> http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion  -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug