DVCS vs. Subversion brittleness (was Re: Moving to D)

Bruno Medeiros brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail
Wed Feb 16 06:51:40 PST 2011


On 11/02/2011 18:31, Michel Fortin wrote:
>>
>> Ideally, if one wants to do push but the ancestor history is
>> incomplete, the VCS would download from the central repository
>> whatever revision/changeset information was missing.
>
> Actually, there's no "central" repository in Git.

That stuff about DVCS not having a central repository is another thing 
that is being said a lot, but is only true in a very shallow (and 
non-useful) way. Yes, in DVCS there are no more "working copies" as in 
Subversion, now everyone's working copy is a full fledged 
repository/clone that in technical terms is peer of any other repository.
However, from an organizational point of view in a project, there is 
always going to be a "central" repository. The one that actually 
represents the product/application/library, where the builds and 
releases are made from. (Of course, there could be more than one central 
repository if there are multiple kinds of releases like 
stable/experimental, or forks of the the product, etc.)
Maybe the DVCS world likes the term public/shared repository better, but 
that doesn't make much difference.


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list