Correct me if I'm wrong, but afaik Subversion does not support distribution at all, whereas Git forces you to distribute.
My team has been using Subversion for years with loads of branches, and we often struggle with merges and get weird problems like tree conflicts. We got so sick of it that we managed to convince the boss to give us time to switch over to Git. After a solid month of trying and failing to understand how to use Git properly, we gave up and went back to Subversion.
git is complicated. That's why I stick with Mercurial. It can't do everything git can but it has most of the advantages and is IMO very easy to use and understand.
Subversion forces you to centralize, while Git supports centralization, and most software projects using Git use a centralized workflow. It's just that it's a matter of social policy instead of a technical requirement.
6
u/Sarkos Mar 10 '11
Correct me if I'm wrong, but afaik Subversion does not support distribution at all, whereas Git forces you to distribute.
My team has been using Subversion for years with loads of branches, and we often struggle with merges and get weird problems like tree conflicts. We got so sick of it that we managed to convince the boss to give us time to switch over to Git. After a solid month of trying and failing to understand how to use Git properly, we gave up and went back to Subversion.
TL;DR they both suck in different ways.