Geek asks and answers

GIT vs SVN: how it differs in terms of commit (in GIT) and just saves the changes locally in a file (in SVN)

I want to know what difference (or rather, an advantage) GIT gives when executing local commits (commit command) compared to just saving changes to the working directory in SVN when working offline (not connected to the server)

I read that GIT gives the advantage of working offline, i.e. the user can perform local records locally as many times as he wants, and then when the user connects to the server, (a) he can push the changes to the remote server. I would like to know why it is beneficial if the entire commit command does this only for the local disk, which again matches the one that simply saves your changes to the disk in SVN (when it is not connected to the server) and does not go to the project branch.

I like GIT, but I can not understand this difference. Please, help!

Thanks Nayan

+3
source share
4 answers

: (, ).

- , , , , . - , . . - (, , - ).

SVN: , , , . , , . , .

Git: , , , , , . . , , .

+11

, - .

, . Git SVN, , , SVN.

SVN , , . Git.

+5

, . .

Git , , ( ), , , - . "" , SVN, .

. SVN , , , . Git .

, , Git . , SVN, , Git;)

, .

+2
source

Above my head:

  • Manage the offline version (no need to contact the remote repository to save work progress).
  • Branching and merging is much easier for task switching.
  • A more complex fusion ... reduces pain during fusion.
  • Keep track of progress without making the rest of your team accept an unfinished state.
+1
source

More articles:


All Articles