Git和DVCS通常都非常适合于独立编写大量代码的开发人员，因为每个人都有自己的分支。但是，如果您需要从其他人那里进行更改，她必须提交给她的本地回购，然后她必须将该更改集推给您，或者您必须从她那里获取更改集。

我自己的推理也让我认为，如果你做集中发布之类的事情，DVCS会让QA和发布管理变得更加困难。必须有人负责从其他人的存储库中进行推送/拉取，解决任何在最初提交时就可以解决的冲突，然后进行构建，然后让所有其他开发人员重新同步他们的回购。

当然，所有这些都可以通过人工流程来解决;DVCS只是破坏了一些由集中式版本控制修复的东西，以便提供一些新的便利。

我非常喜欢能够在Git中管理源代码的本地分支，而不会混淆中央存储库的水。在许多情况下，我将从Subversion服务器签出代码并运行本地Git存储库，只是为了能够做到这一点。初始化Git存储库不会因为到处都是烦人的.svn文件夹而污染文件系统，这一点也很棒。

至于Windows工具的支持，TortoiseGit处理基本的很好，但我仍然喜欢命令行，除非我想查看日志。我真的很喜欢Tortoise{Git|SVN}在读取提交日志时的帮助方式。

这里所有的答案都是意料之中的，以程序员为中心，但是如果你的公司在源代码之外使用修订控制会发生什么呢?有很多文档不是源代码，它们受益于版本控制，应该与代码接近，而不是在另一个CMS中。大多数程序员都不是孤立地工作——我们作为团队的一部分为公司工作。

考虑到这一点，比较Subversion和git在客户端工具和培训方面的易用性。我看不出有哪一种分布式修订控制系统会更容易使用或向非程序员解释。我很乐意被证明是错误的，因为这样我就可以评估git，并希望它能够被那些需要版本控制的人(而不是程序员)接受。

即便如此，如果管理层问我为什么我们应该从集中式版本控制系统转向分布式版本控制系统，我也很难给出一个诚实的答案，因为我们不需要它。

Disclaimer: I became interested in Subversion early on (around v0.29) so obviously I'm biased, but the companies I've worked for since that time are benefiting from my enthusiasm because I've encouraged and supported its use. I suspect this is how it happens with most software companies. With so many programmers jumping on the git bandwagon, I wonder how many companies are going to miss out on the benefits of using version control outside of source code? Even if you have separate systems for different teams, you're missing out on some of the benefits, such as (unified) issue tracking integration, whilst increasing maintenance, hardware and training requirements.

“为什么Git比X好”概述了Git相对于其他scm的各种优缺点。

简要:

Git tracks content rather than files Branches are lightweight and merging is easy, and I mean really easy. It's distributed, basically every repository is a branch. It's much easier to develop concurrently and collaboratively than with Subversion, in my opinion. It also makes offline development possible. It doesn't impose any workflow, as seen on the above linked website, there are many workflows possible with Git. A Subversion-style workflow is easily mimicked. Git repositories are much smaller in file size than Subversion repositories. There's only one ".git" directory, as opposed to dozens of ".svn" repositories (note Subversion 1.7 and higher now uses a single directory like Git.) The staging area is awesome, it allows you to see the changes you will commit, commit partial changes and do various other stuff. Stashing is invaluable when you do "chaotic" development, or simply want to fix a bug while you're still working on something else (on a different branch). You can rewrite history, which is great for preparing patch sets and fixing your mistakes (before you publish the commits) … and a lot more.

有一些缺点:

There aren't many good GUIs for it yet. It's new and Subversion has been around for a lot longer, so this is natural as there are a few interfaces in development. Some good ones include TortoiseGit and GitHub for Mac. Partial checkouts/clones of repositories are not possible at the moment (I read that it's in development). However, there is submodule support. Git 1.7+ supports sparse checkouts. It might be harder to learn, even though I did not find this to be the case (about a year ago). Git has recently improved its interface and is quite user friendly.

在最简单的用法中，Subversion和Git是差不多的。两者之间没有太大区别:

svn checkout svn://foo.com/bar bar
cd bar
# edit
svn commit -m "foo"

and

git clone git@github.com:foo/bar.git
cd bar
# edit
git commit -a -m "foo"
git push

Git真正的亮点在于分支和与其他人一起工作。

首先，并发版本控制似乎是一个很容易解决的问题。一点也不。无论如何……

SVN非常不直观。Git更糟糕。这可能是因为开发人员喜欢并发版本控制这样的难题，他们对制作一个好的UI没有多大兴趣。[/ sarcastic-speculation]

SVN supporters think they don't need a distributed version-control system. I thought that too. But now that we use Git exclusively, I'm a believer. Now version control works for me AND the team/project instead of just working for the project. When I need a branch, I branch. Sometimes it's a branch that has a corresponding branch on the server, and sometimes it does not. Not to mention all the other advantages that I'll have to go study up on (thanks in part to the arcane and absurd lack of UI that is a modern version control system).

我认为Subversion很好。直到你开始合并…或者做任何复杂的事情。或者做任何Subversion认为复杂的事情(比如查询哪些分支弄乱了特定的文件，更改实际上来自哪里，检测复制和粘贴，等等)…

我不同意获胜的答案，我认为GIT的主要好处是离线工作——它当然有用，但它更像是我的用例的额外功能。SVK也可以离线工作，对我来说，把我的学习时间投入到哪一个是没有问题的)。

只是它非常强大、快速，而且——在习惯了这些概念之后——非常有用(是的，在这个意义上:用户友好)。

有关合并故事的更多细节，请参见: 使用git-svn(或类似)*只是*帮助svn合并?