Public Git repo

[Geert Janssens]

On Monday 10 January 2011, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> writes:
> > On Wednesday 05 January 2011, Jeff Kletsky wrote:
> >> I don't like that history is a pretty flexible thing and that "branches"
> >> are just pointers to specific commits, rather than the kind of
> >> "followable path" that svn provides.
> > 
> > That's interesting, because I feel exactly the oposite. I don't like it
> > that for svn a branch or tag is a path into the repository. It has
> > always felt artificial to me and if not treated with proper care could
> > put you into very unwanted situations like people inadvertently
> > committing changes to a tagged release.
> > I guess this is mostly a matter of taste and what you are most used to
> > though...
> 
> I like that branches are paths, because you DO want to be able to make
> additional commits into a branch.  So I don't agree with you there.

After I sent my message I realised I should have treated tags and branches 
differently. I agree obviously that it should be possible to commit changes to 
branches.

git and svn implement this requirement in different ways. I just happen to 
prefer the git way even though I have a lot more experience in svn.

But as I said, this is personal and subjective.

> However, I do agree with you about tags.
> 
> IMHO branches and tags are (and should be) fundamentally different.  A
> branch should be a path, but a tag is, well, a tag.
> 
> > Geert
> 
> -derek