|
Don't trust GIT with bare repo (decentralized VCS) is suitable for team work.
If you do project management, you will know how bad it is.
For team work, centralized (TFS, SVN etc) is better.
I use Visual Studio online for GIT.
Subversion Edge for SVN.
I don't like TFS, because the learning curve and not much guide exist, still hard to learn. 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm relatively new to the programming world so I'm still working on small projects where the project is generally completed before source control is really needed or even considered. Of course, when I start working on bigger projects, I'll definitely use some kind of source control.
|
|
|
|
|
Personally I don't know if software projects can be to small to use version control.
We use git all the time. A script commits changes each six hours. The advantage is that from the moment something goes wrong you have always a version to backtrack to. Furthermore you can use git as an automatic backup system: by pushing to a remote server you only use for backup purposes you have a cheap backup system.
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, sorry for the late reply. Your point on using git as an automatic backup system is pretty decent. I'll definitely be sure to start doing that at the very least. So thanks for that little tip there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, sorry for the late reply. Version control systems are a pretty new thing for me; the link you sent has been really useful so thanks for that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
We use TFS 2013, has the web portal, and all the bells and whistles. Why Not!
|
|
|
|
|
I find tipping the bottle so it is vertical to the plate at 90 degrees until the sauce starts to run then bringing it back to a 45-35 degree angle so you control how much spills out onto the Bacon Sandwich is the best way.
|
|
|
|
|
Of course they all have they goods and bads but as long as the one you use suites your needs then I would probable recommend you to stick with it.
I Started with CVS then SourceSafe, TFS, SVN and now Git.
The only time I actually migrated from one to other was from SourceSafe to SVN after some commits disappeared.
Cheers!
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
Finally I am in the majority this time! 
|
|
|
|
|
Which I find shocking given how bad it is! Unfortunately I use in the office, but would choose Git every time
|
|
|
|
|
In terms of product acceptance alone, putting aside the attributes of either system, Git is a name that should never adorn a product. In the west it means "Go Away!".
Conversely, the name SubVersion is genius.
Git is a stupid mistake of a name. Whoever named it needs to get out more.
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently Linus Torvalds had that in mind when he named Git (although he implies a different meaning).
Torvalds has quipped about the name git, which is British English slang roughly equivalent to "unpleasant person". Torvalds said: "I'm an egotistical bastard, and I name all my projects after myself. First 'Linux', now 'git'." The man page describes git as "the stupid content tracker".
Wikipedia link[^]
I guess he doesn't get out much, what with all the OS development and whatever... 
Personally I prefer Mercurial, though I seldom get to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BitBucket isn't a source control system - it's hosting for a source control system. If you're using BitBucket then you're either using Git or Mercurial as your "source code control system".
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification. 
I never used that.But I heard about that.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I was customized using SVN.
From this vote, I know many source control tool exists. Then what is the difference between those and which is the best? 
|
|
|
|
|
Differences: see here.
The best: depends on project and team...
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your kindly answer!
|
|
|
|
|
And we just upgraded to the 2005 version 
|
|
|
|
|
You are not alone. Same here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
