我正在开始一个新的分布式项目。我应该使用SVN还是Git,为什么?
当前回答
我从来没有理解过“git在Windows上不好”这个概念;我只在Windows下开发,git从来没有遇到过任何问题。
我绝对推荐git而不是subversion;它只是更加通用,并且允许“离线开发”,这是subversion永远无法做到的。它可以在几乎所有可以想象到的平台上使用,并且拥有比你可能使用过的更多的功能。
其他回答
SVN的2个主要优点很少被提及:
Large file support. In addition to code, I use SVN to manage my home directory. SVN is the only VCS (distributed or not) that doesn't choke on my TrueCrypt files (please correct me if there's another VCS that handles 500MB+ files effectively). This is because diff comparisons are streamed (this is a very essential point). Rsync is unacceptable because it's not 2-way. Partial repository (subdir) checkout/checkin. Mercurial and bzr don't support this, and git's support is limited. This is bad in a team environment, but invaluable if I want to check something out on another computer from my home dir.
只是我的经验。
If your team is already familiar with version and source control softwares like cvs or svn, then, for a simple and small project (such as you claim it is), I would recommend you stick to SVN. I am really comfortable with svn, but for the current e-commerce project I am doing on django, I decided to work on git (I am using git in svn-mode, that is, with a centralised repo that I push to and pull from in order to collaborate with at least one other developer). The other developer is comfortable with SVN, and while others' experiences may differ, both of us are having a really bad time embracing git for this small project. (We are both hardcore Linux users, if it matters at all.)
当然,你的里程可能会有所不同。
我会选择SVN,因为它传播更广泛,知名度更高。
我想Git更适合Linux用户。
在做了更多的研究,并查看了这个链接:https://git.wiki.kernel.org/articles/g/i/t/GitSvnComparison_cb82.html
(摘录如下):
It's incredibly fast. No other SCM that I have used has been able to keep up with it, and I've used a lot, including Subversion, Perforce, darcs, BitKeeper, ClearCase and CVS. It's fully distributed. The repository owner can't dictate how I work. I can create branches and commit changes while disconnected on my laptop, then later synchronize that with any number of other repositories. Synchronization can occur over many media. An SSH channel, over HTTP via WebDAV, by FTP, or by sending emails holding patches to be applied by the recipient of the message. A central repository isn't necessary, but can be used. Branches are even cheaper than they are in Subversion. Creating a branch is as simple as writing a 41 byte file to disk. Deleting a branch is as simple as deleting that file. Unlike Subversion branches carry along their complete history. without having to perform a strange copy and walk through the copy. When using Subversion I always found it awkward to look at the history of a file on branch that occurred before the branch was created. from #git: spearce: I don't understand one thing about SVN in the page. I made a branch i SVN and browsing the history showed the whole history a file in the branch Branch merging is simpler and more automatic in Git. In Subversion you need to remember what was the last revision you merged from so you can generate the correct merge command. Git does this automatically, and always does it right. Which means there's less chance of making a mistake when merging two branches together. Branch merges are recorded as part of the proper history of the repository. If I merge two branches together, or if I merge a branch back into the trunk it came from, that merge operation is recorded as part of the repostory history as having been performed by me, and when. It's hard to dispute who performed the merge when it's right there in the log. Creating a repository is a trivial operation: mkdir foo; cd foo; git init That's it. Which means I create a Git repository for everything these days. I tend to use one repository per class. Most of those repositories are under 1 MB in disk as they only store lecture notes, homework assignments, and my LaTeX answers. The repository's internal file formats are incredible simple. This means repair is very easy to do, but even better because it's so simple its very hard to get corrupted. I don't think anyone has ever had a Git repository get corrupted. I've seen Subversion with fsfs corrupt itself. And I've seen Berkley DB corrupt itself too many times to trust my code to the bdb backend of Subversion. Git's file format is very good at compressing data, despite it's a very simple format. The Mozilla project's CVS repository is about 3 GB; it's about 12 GB in Subversion's fsfs format. In Git it's around 300 MB.
在阅读了所有这些之后,我确信Git是可行的方法(尽管存在一点学习曲线)。我也在Windows平台上使用过Git和SVN。
我很想听听其他人在读完上面的文章后会怎么说?
YouTube上有一个关于这个的有趣视频。这句话出自莱纳斯·托瓦尔兹本人:google Tech Talk:莱纳斯·托瓦尔兹谈git
推荐文章
- 为什么我需要显式地推一个新分支?
- 如何撤消最后的git添加?
- Rubymine:如何让Git忽略Rubymine创建的.idea文件
- Gitignore二进制文件,没有扩展名
- Git隐藏错误:Git隐藏弹出并最终与合并冲突
- 了解Git和GitHub的基础知识
- 没有。Git目录的Git克隆
- Git与Mercurial仓库的互操作性
- 忽略git中修改(但未提交)的文件?
- “git restore”命令是什么?“git restore”和“git reset”之间有什么区别?
- Git合并与强制覆盖
- Git拉另一个分支
- 在Bash命令提示符上添加git分支
- 如何更改Git日志日期格式
- git pull -rebase和git pull -ff-only之间的区别