From: Brian Mitchell Date: 2007-03-15T06:00:50+09:00 Subject: Re: Why SVN? On 3/14/07, Austin Ziegler wrote: > On 3/12/07, Trans wrote: > > Should I be using SVN rather than Darcs or Git? > > Yes. > > Darcs and Git are distributed version control systems without much > proven technology behind them, and are painfully Unix-oriented. > > > So I'm wondering, what's so special about SVN as opposed to the other > > choices? Is it because SVN is more like CVS than the other choices? > > The fact that SVN isn't distributed I would think would work against > > it (though I hear SVK is supposed to deal with that). Darcs is written > > in Haskell, and from the word on the street a lot of Ruby folk seem to > > like Haskell. Also, Git was written by Linus Torvalds, which is about > > as good as credentials can get. > > Quality in kernel management doesn't mean his version control system > is any good. I'm not saying it's bad -- at all -- but the credentials > don't transfer there. > > Distributed systems fit very few development models. > > -austin I can't resist replying to this troll. I call FUD on the "distributed version control systems without much proven technology behind them" claim until we get details. I'd really like to hear why you think you have a winner just because something is different. It's obvious you think you have a great reason to feel strongly about using Subversion. I think it is only fair that you share why if you plan on telling people such absolutes. So please, enlighten me. Brian.