[tlug] "Centralized" vs, "distributed" VCSs

[Curt Sampson <cjs@example.com>]

On 2009-02-20 17:00 +0900 (Fri), Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> The difference is that projects using DVCSes use the VCS to do
> merging....

Actually, those with central VCSs use the VCS to merge, too. Every time
you do an "svn update," you're doing a merge. (As well as when you do
things such as "svn merge" between branches and all, of course.)

> and have the option of doing it centrally.  Those using
> legacy VCSes have no choice but to insist that the developers do the
> merging, not the VCS.

Huh? Some developer somewhere always has to do the merge. It's just a
matter of who does it, and where, when and how.

> "Centralized" refers to whether you have to push to communicate your
> changes to others or not.

Hm? Someone, somewhere, always has to push or pull changes to get them
into the main release (except for the guy who is committing to the main
release "branch" or "repo" or whatever you care to call it).

> Both terms also apply to workflows.  Typically the problem is that
> people confuse VCS (infrastructure == possible workflows) with
> workflow (== politically mandated).

True, though I'm not confusing them. Part of my point, though, is that
while both svn and git, say, can support certain ways of working, for
some of those ways svn is rather more convenient to use that git. (For
others, obviously, git is more convenient, and for others yet, svn can't
support it at all, at least not without the help of things like svk.)

> And of those several dozen, how many have an URL to their current
> active repo that you can post so that I can pull from it?

All of them: anoncvs.netbsd.org. You don't even need to know who they
are; it's all in one convenient place.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson       <cjs@example.com>        +81 90 7737 2974
           Functional programming in all senses of the word:
                   http://www.starling-software.com