On May 11, 2008, at 12:29 AM, Justin Leung wrote:

quoted text
> Hi Kevin,
>
> The ability of inter-user (designer-verifier) code sync'ing without  
> letting the incomplete or incompatible RTL code to propagate to the  
> main build stream is going to facilitate the design flow and  
> efficiency .
>
> The ability of local revision control means that no more over  
> writing of design files until commit .
>
> I think these 2 things will really buy us alot .
>
> Justin
>
>> Honestly, it sounds like SVN is actually a good fit here. Just  
>> because git is awesome for many things does not mean it is the end- 
>> all-be-all  of version control systems. SVN still has its place as  
>> the last true centralized system. Given your constraints and  
>> workflow, why do you  think git is better than SVN?
>>
>> -Kevin Ballard

But they come at an expense - no more linear revision numbers, more  
complex commands, etc. You can't have it both ways.

You could always use a main SVN repo and then use git-svn to maintain  
your own private git repos, do all the code syncing you want there,  
and then push it back to SVN when you want to send it back to the main  
build stream. If you go this route, be careful to maintain a linear  
history on the branch that tracks the SVN repo, as SVN cannot handle  
merges the way git can. You'll want to either do rebasing or squashed  
merges (to avoid multiple parents).

-Kevin Ballard

-- 
Kevin Ballard
http://kevin.sb.org
kevin@sb.org
http://www.tildesoft.com


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html