From: "Stefan Beller" <sbel...@google.com>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 3:29 AM
bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity
--
The part that the author misses is not all the nice (or not so) stuff
about having a copy of the full repository locally, for all the reasons
he mentions, rather it is the *distribution of control*.
In most centralised repo systems there is also centralisation of
control. The user does not have control. I may initiate a request for
change, but it's authorisation is always somewhere else, to avoid my
accidental pollution of the golden source.
The thing that a DVCS brings to the user is an ability to regain a
little control of their own environment and to include version recording
within it. The fact that it can be integrated seamlessly into the golden
source makes it a great tool providing a win-win for all, especially
when a Hub environment provides a separation between the golden source
and the user's perambulations and peregrinations that they'd like on a
safe server.
It is the distribution of Control, not the distribution of Code that
makes DVCS such a winner (for users). The distribution of all the code
is icing on the cake (though natural in a FOSS project).
--
Philip
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
