Linus Torvalds discussing source control programs and GIT

[Christopher Browne]

On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 7:54 PM, William Muriithi <
william.muriithi-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
> > Well, seems like PlasticSCM has the same prohibitive problem as
> BitKeeper, which is that its proprietors may take their toys away at their
> will.
> >
> > Perhaps ok for a "corporate" project where there's vastly more risk of
> the company cancelling the project than of vendor rot, but utterly
> unacceptable for free software projects.
>
> Plus, it seem like a Windows SCM. They say it has a weak support for Unix
> and OSX. Essentially, that to me imply you need to be on Windows platform.
>
I noticed that, yeah.  They didn't really explain what "weak" meant in that
context.

> Now, I got curious by noticing it support both centralized development and
> distributed development, I thought this would be exclusive?  How do they
> pull that?
>
I don't think that's too terribly hard.

If you attach policy that requires that commits get some sort of approval
in a central place, that imposes centralization.  You can do that with Git
by having commit hook scripts in a central place, for instance.  That
doesn't diminish that the model of Git supports distributed development.

Perhaps they do similar.

If the distributable bits only run on Windows, and you only have 1 Windows
server in your environment, then that would effectively centralize things
:-)
-- 
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20140119/1b92f801/attachment.html>