Re: cvs better than git?

[Andreas Krey <a.krey%gmx.de@localhost>]

On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 16:18:17 +0000, Riccardo Mottola wrote:
...
> Local repositories are a mess.. Don't you hate that if you have a set of 
> local changes you cannot just "git pulL" without doing a commit for a 
> merge?

'git stash; git pull; git stash pop' (with a usabiliby quirk when there
are conflicts).


> However, a local repo has a big advantage: the possibility to quickly 
> determine the status.

...or do logs, diffs, commits, checkouts, merges...

...
> remember SourceForge issues? or other sites? GIThub has its merits, but 
> one thing I hate: before MS era its interface was very compatible, so 
> you could use it with may browsers.

If you use github like a plain cvs or svn server, you hardly ever interact
with it with a browser. Moreover, even if github should spontaneously
vanish, you and your collaborators can just point their remotes to a
different hoster, push, and continue as if nothing happened. (Not so
easily if you also use the pullreq and social features of github.)

- Andreas

-- 
"Totally trivial. Famous last words."
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800