My point exactly. Currently working with a team of testers, they are very happy with mcz indeed. And have no clue of git.
Phil On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas < offray.l...@mutabit.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > On 14/01/17 06:58, Dimitris Chloupis wrote: > > [...] > >> >> I also never said "Do not use Pharo VCS" , if that is what rocks your >> boat, but to actual claim that Pharo VCS is more reliable, easier to use >> and more powerful would require a huge leap of faith because from the very >> first experience it pretty crystal clear that is not. >> >> And there is not just Git, there are plenty of other VCS out there that >> are just light years ahead, some probably better than Git. >> >> > [...] > > In our case, with field work with not programmers and newbies, I can tell > there is no leap of faith at all. We have been using external DVCs and > internal ones. The workflow with the later is simpler, they don't see > anything about reliability or difficult. Just update and commit (fossil is > similar in someway). Maybe is the small scale of the project or the local > community, but in this context, git has been really obtrusive, while StHub > for code and fossil for files are not. > > Cheers, > > Offray > > >
