Re: cvs better than git?

[Johnny Billquist <bqt%update.uu.se@localhost>]

On 2020-06-21 18:17, Andreas Krey wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2020 17:59:59 +0000, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> ...
> > > You're a bit hung up on the word 'commit', and the finality of commits
> > > in some VCSes, it seems.
> >
> > So are obviously everyone using git in combination with gerrit...
>
> What? The gerrit model is exactly that: Make commits to be reviewed,
> rewrite commits according to review feedback until everyone is satisfied;
> then merge in those commits.

So then you didn't understand a thing I wrote then, if you think I used 
the words with some different meaning.
What you do on your local repository is totally uninteresting.
What happens where anyone else can see it is what is relevant.

> If you call the entire process of accepting (after finished reviewe)
> the final commit set, and integrating and publishing them 'committing'
> you'll find yourself in some trouble discussing with other people.

That is what literally the word "commit" means. Until that point, you 
are not committed.

This discussion is meaningless. You simple cannot accept that your 
favorite tool have warts, or that others do not think it's the best 
thing since sliced bread. And I have absolutely no interest in trying to 
convince you that git sucks. If it tickles you in all the right places, 
then good for you.

I still hate it, and you will not convince me otherwise. I've used it 
enough to have an opinion of my own instead of just trusting the true 
believers.

  Johnny

--
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt%softjar.se@localhost             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol