来自SourceGear的Eric Sink写了一系列关于分布式和非分布式版本控制系统之间区别的文章。他比较了最流行的版本控制系统的优缺点。非常有趣的读物。 文章可以在他的博客www.ericsink.com上找到:

阅读差异 Git是版本控制工具中的C Git缺乏对不变性和DVCS最佳实践的尊重 DVCS和dag，第1部分 DVCS和dag，第2部分 DVCS和Bug跟踪 合并历史，dag和Darcs Git为什么这么快? Mercurial, Subversion和Wesley Snipes

我喜欢DVCS的主要原因是:

You can commit broken things. It doesn't matter because other peoples won't see them until you publish. Publish time is different of commit time. Because of this you can commit more often. You can merge complete functionnality. This functionnality will have its own branch. All commits of this branch will be related to this functionnality. You can do it with a CVCS however with DVCS its the default. You can search your history (find when a function changed ) You can undo a pull if someone screw up the main repository, you don't need to fix the errors. Just clear the merge. When you need a source control in any directory do : git init . and you can commit, undoing changes, etc... It's fast (even on Windows )

一个相对较大的项目的主要原因是由点3创建的改进的交流。其他的则是不错的奖金。

“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。

来自SourceGear的Eric Sink写了一系列关于分布式和非分布式版本控制系统之间区别的文章。他比较了最流行的版本控制系统的优缺点。非常有趣的读物。 文章可以在他的博客www.ericsink.com上找到:

阅读差异 Git是版本控制工具中的C Git缺乏对不变性和DVCS最佳实践的尊重 DVCS和dag，第1部分 DVCS和dag，第2部分 DVCS和Bug跟踪 合并历史，dag和Darcs Git为什么这么快? Mercurial, Subversion和Wesley Snipes

使用Git，您几乎可以脱机做任何事情，因为每个人都有自己的存储库。

创建分支和合并分支非常简单。

即使你没有项目的提交权限，你仍然可以拥有自己的在线存储库，并发布补丁的“推送请求”。每个喜欢你的补丁的人都可以把它们拉到他们的项目中，包括官方的维护者。

分叉一个项目，修改它，并仍然从HEAD分支中合并错误修复是很简单的。

Git适用于Linux内核开发人员。这意味着它非常快(必须如此)，并且可以扩展到数千个贡献者。Git使用的空间也更少(Mozilla存储库的空间最多减少30倍)。

Git非常灵活，非常TIMTOWTDI(有不止一种方法可以做到)。你可以使用任何你想要的工作流，Git会支持它。

最后，还有GitHub，一个托管Git存储库的好网站。

Git的缺点:

它更难学，因为Git有更多的概念和命令。 修订版不像subversion那样有版本号 许多Git命令是神秘的，错误消息对用户非常不友好 它缺少一个好的GUI(比如伟大的TortoiseSVN)

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。