Re: Alternative DVCS to git: hg?

[Andrew Cagney <andrew.cagney%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 15:52, Johnny Billquist <bqt%update.uu.se@localhost> wrote:

> Why do you insist on the "at the same time"? It can be at any time, and
> the problem is the same.

there are various tricks to reduce the window; but yes

> > With ACID, since the second developer's change gets rejected, they can
> > be rest assured that things didn't break.
>
> git instead goes even more crazy. You have your local copy, which might
> be totally out of sync with the master, and you might be doing all kind
> of changes, and then when you sync up with the master, you have all kind
> of conflicts on files that have been changed by both, but files that
> have only been changed by one side will happily pass through, and you
> actually have the exact same situation you are complaining about. So git
> does absolutely nothing to solve this.

And after all this, no matter how much of a mess is created, it is
still all local.  The developer gets to decide if it should be pushed,
and if they do, wear the consequences.

(The scenario isn't unique to CVS and svn - just start hacking on an
out-of-date source; however with git at least I've got tools such as
'git rebase --abort' so that if there's a snafu I can back out -
something I can't easly do with CVS and only with write privileges
with SVN)