Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Hypocrite. (Score 1) 165

by DrVxD (#44073301) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Self-Hosting Git Repositories?

I wasn't replying to the question, I was replying to your comment:

So you want use open source software but you don't want to open source your own?

I was drawing attention to the fact that GitHub use open source software, but don't open source their own (although if you're wallet is fat enough, they'll license you a black-box appliance to run on your own hosts) - which is what you seem to be criticising the question for.

Comment: Re:I can't even think of enjoying svn ever again.. (Score 1) 378

by DrVxD (#44052723) Attached to: Subversion 1.8 Released But Will You Still Use Git?

Does SVN still force all my pending changes into one commit? (and one commit message to rule them all?)

For what it's worth, SVN has never done this - you can specify which files to commit in a given changeset.

Does SVN still force my commits to be immediately visible to everyone else

Not if you don't want it to. You can configure access control such that everyone has their own private branches on the server.

(but despite the fact that neither of these are valid complaints, git is still a much better tool that svn IMO).

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.