Mark Little wrote:
Not convinced it's a problem for TS. It may look it for this one specific case, but I doubt it will be that useful in the long term. We discussed this several times within the team and didn't see a reason to move. I haven't seen or heard anything different recently.
I think this is avery bad decision. Tom did not sell git on its true merits. The most important benefit is that git really does make it much much easier for one person or several people to make parallel changes, For example to do a long redesign of a moderate to large component of the code while still fixing small bugs. Even when the code is split into silos ownedby different devs that's a common scenario for a single indivdual. The great benefit si that it allows you to takedifferent changes and merge them in your own private branches to see hwo they mix without having to push them up the tree into a shared branch. That means you can try before you buy without having to have planned it in advance.
with svn you normally end up putting one set of changes into trunk and then pulling it down into your branch only to find it breaks things too late. you can use svnto do collaborative work in branches but it requires you to plan all that collaboration in advance, merging changes into a shared branch before they can go into trunk. this also stops you publishing to trunk until they are all done.
This is also very important for external collaborators. They cannot know what we are doing to the code so keeping their branch up to date as we makeincompatible changes forces them to continually import slabs of changes into their edited repos in order to see if their patches still work. With git it is easy to check import the changes bit by bit and see where things break