Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote: > | i can continue with the problems for updating from the main tree compared > | to svn if you like (these are not to prove git is something worse, but > | to discard your claims that git know everything what svn plus something > | more > | - two different tools for two different workflows.) > > Sure. I am not saying that the two tools have equal workflow. > I am saying that they can be equivalent, central repo etc. all devvies > push to central repo etc. Svn _only_ has this option, git is more > flexible.
actually i would like to hear why svn repo + git-svn solution is not good choice. from the very vegining i'm not trying to degrade git possibilities but trying to argue for the possibility above. instead of svn vs git flames i would like you to present drawbacks of svn+git-svn solution comapred to the git one. up to now only the clone/checkout problem has been raised and i beleive it can be solved if we look on it. what else? pavel
