Of course not but it wouldn't happen as often as it does right now and we wouldn't have so much trouble with it for sure (as the number of commiters/contributors gets higher). And to be honest, git actually has some more "magic" than svn and certainly some better approaches. I won't point out the differences in detail, everyone is able to have a look at descriptions of those systems.
Denis On Wednesday, 28. March 2012 at 5:16 PM, Christopher Brooks wrote: > > svn is obsolete and not a good version control tool for so many > > contributors. I pointed out the many advantages of git already. > > And right now you all see how "good" svn is at branching/merging > > back/whatever (just have a look at the broken trunk). I don't want to > > say "I said it" but... I said it. > > > > > Git doesn't magically fix mergebacks. > > When there is a conflict because of out of order editing a human needs > to fix it. Neither git nor svn will do this automatically. > > Are you suggesting that a change to git will mean our trunk never > breaks? > > Chris > > -- > Christopher Brooks, BSc, MSc > ARIES Laboratory, University of Saskatchewan > > Web: http://www.cs.usask.ca/~cab938 > Phone: 1.306.966.1442 > Mail: Advanced Research in Intelligent Educational Systems Laboratory > Department of Computer Science > University of Saskatchewan > 176 Thorvaldson Building > 110 Science Place > Saskatoon, SK > S7N 5C9 > >
_______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
