[poppler] Switching source control tools.

[Jeff Muizelaar]

On Sat, Apr 28, 2007 at 11:18:35AM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Saturday 28 April 2007 00:50, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> > On 4/27/07, Brad Hards <bradh at frogmouth.net> wrote:
> > > On Friday 27 April 2007 04:52, Jeff Muizelaar wrote:
> > > > So what do people, especially Albert, think? Now that 302 is merged
> > > > (thanks Albert) we have time to do less constructive things like argue
> > > > about which SCM to use :)
> > >
> > > I'd prefer subversion, just because I'm already familiar with it. Not
> > > familiar with git, and I don't see decentralised as that big an
> > > advantage.
> >
> > (Apologies for yet another bad car analogy)
> >
> > I think that's a common position if you never tried git.  But there's
> > a difference between, say, buying a car, where you can pick and choose
> > only the features you want because you're going to drive it, and
> > selecting an SCM, where you'll just be one of several developers using
> > the tool.
> To paraphrase: "we want git, too bad".
> 
> > The point I'm trying to make is that git can work in a centralized
> > mode just as well as svn, and if you don't care about the
> > decentralized features of git, just pretend they're not there.  Even
> > if you don't need the features, there's no need to prevent others from
> > benefitting from disconnected commits, local history browsing, local,
> > cheap branches and all that.
> How about svn and svk. Or svn with local git tools. You can get what you want, 
> and I can get what I want.

What are your reasons for wanting svn?

-Jeff