On 11/25/13 9:42 AM, Michael Sokolov wrote:
> About git: you can use git more-or-less like svn, although there are
> definitely extra steps. One thing I have come to really like about it
> is the ability to commit changes without immediately sharing them with
> the world (you commit, and then push, as two steps). You could do this
> with svn branches, kind of, but they seem so heavyweight and I never
> really use them as much as perhaps I should. I do find myself searching
> stackoverflow every so often when I get into weird git situations.
Yep. I'm surprised not to have found a "combine add, commit, and push"
feature in git to make it as quick as SVN for those used to SVN.
However, I utterly marvel at the multi-user working on an airplane
scenarios that git regularly makes possible for our authors, and not
just with code.
Also, this isn't very off-topic. O'Reilly uses git with markup
(asciidoc, HTML, DocBook) for most of our book development and
production these days. I suspect that in the long run git may prove a
worthy alternative to many content management systems:
<http://programming.oreilly.com/2013/11/restructuring-the-web-with-git.html>
Though it treats markup all as text, with no understanding of markup
structures. I've not yet decided if that's a feature or a bug.
Thanks,
--
Simon St.Laurent
http://simonstl.com/
