Hello,
I had already made the proposal to Gerald some time ago and I'm really ok with this proposal.
I started using git three years ago and even if the underlying concepts are slightly different from cvs/svn, once we're used to it, it is not possible to go back to cvs/svn. I've introduced it in my previous company and if at the beginning, there were some people doubting about the advantages of git, now they are *all loving* this tool and there is no one wanting to go back to cvs/svn.
Git support for windows improved a lot since its start and turtoise seems to work quite well now (I'm though not a windows user).
If git is not well-suited for windows, there exists another one which is really similar - developed at the same time by another kernel developer - called mercury (hg).
At last, it is possible to interact between git and svn with ... git-svn. It is what I'm doing for wireshark, it is not the ideal but it works pretty well.
[]s,
Sebastien
On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 09:31, Ulf Lamping
<ulf.lamping@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Joerg Mayer schrieb:
> Hello,
>
> this is just something that went through my mind yesterday while working
> on the third patch on the same files and without a chance to commit
> between the patches. If there is one thing that I don't like (although
> I do it sometimes) is to do a commit that does several things at once.
> With git, I could commit each patch (which is done locally) and eventually
> push all commits to the central repository while maintaing the indivitual
> character of the commits.
> I don't like git very much, but that's what various projects I'm tracking
> use, so that's why I propose the use of git. Also - if I'm not mistaken -
> some people seem to use tortoise and that tool seems to have git support.
Tortoise git support was not suitable for productive use the last time
I've read their page.
AFAIK, moving to git would be a big hurdle for Windows developers.
Regards, ULFL
