Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches.

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by iskander on Thursday March 25, 2010 @03:13PM (#1219223)

I use SVN on a 2 person academic project. It works great, I've never had any problems or complaints. Is there some compelling reason to switch to a distributed VCS?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by d0m on Thursday March 25, 2010 @03:39PM (#1219296)

I like running with only one leg; it works well. But I'm too stubborn to try with 2, even if professional athletes keep telling me it is better for many reasons.

IE6 works well for me by the way. And I play piano without black keys, it works well for me. Oh, and you know what, I always study the night before my exam, it works well for me.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by iskander on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:15PM (#1219672)

But what exactly is better?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by xilun666 on Thursday March 25, 2010 @08:29PM (#1219915)

Branching

At the beginning you're are not even conscious that you can, but once you've discovered the power it gives you, you will branch twice a day just because you can (and more if you need).

The two stage commit approach of git is interesting but not fundamental IMHO. "stash" is really cool.

The kind of features git gives me makes me use it even when I code alone.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by e40 on Thursday March 25, 2010 @03:46PM (#1219312)

I skipped over SVN on my way to Git from CVS, but I've heard the handling of branches in SVN isn't much better than CVS, and there it is absolutely horrible.

So, if you don't use branches it is understandable why you are happy with SVN. If you want branches, you'll need Git something like it (HG).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by iskander on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:16PM (#1219679)

Yep, we don't use branches. Maybe that's the reason everyone seems to have such (otherwise mystifyingly) negative opinions of SVN.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by neilc on Thursday March 25, 2010 @05:38PM (#1219579)

Branches work just fine in SVN. Merging isn't great, but it is much better with merge tracking in recent versions of SVN.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by rbonvall on Thursday March 25, 2010 @11:06PM (#1220140)

For me it was the other way around. Using git made me want to use branches.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by RyanMcGreal on Thursday March 25, 2010 @03:27PM (#1219260)

Sheer speed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Joel is wrong. Subversion does not equal leeches. by iskander on Thursday March 25, 2010 @06:14PM (#1219670)

Perhaps my project is too small to encounter performance issues (only have ~15k lines of code), but SVN has always been perfectly snappy.

[ Parent | on HN ]