Re: Adding Git to Better SCM Initiative : Comparison

[Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>]

Jakub Narebski, Thu, Nov 29, 2007 03:26:12 +0100:
> +                <s id="git">
> +                    Medium. There's Git User's Manual, manpages, some
> +                    technical documentation and some howtos.  All
> +                    documentation is also available online in HTML format;
> +                    there is additional information (including beginnings
> +                    of FAQ) on git wiki.
> +                    Nevertheles one of complaints in surveys is insufficient

"Nevertheless" (two "s").

BTW, I wouldn't call the level of documentation "Medium" when compared
to any commercial SCM. How can they earn more than "a little", when
compared to any opensource program?

> @@ -894,6 +938,14 @@ TODO:
>                      to install the subversion perl bindings and a few modules
>                      from CPAN.
>                  </s>
> +                <s id="git">
> +                    TO DO. RPMs and deb packages for Linux. msysGit and
> +                    Cygwin for Win32 - Git requires POSIX shell, Perl,
> +                    and POSIX utilities for some commands (builtin).

I read this as: "Git requires all these programs for builtin
commands". Which is a bit confusing. Just drop "(builtin)"?

> +                    Autoconf to generate Makefile configuration; ready
> +                    generic configuration for many OS. Compiling docs
> +                    requires asciidoc and xmlto toolchain, but prebuild.

"prebuilt" (with "t"). Maybe remove ", but prebuilt" completely?

> @@ -1106,6 +1165,10 @@ TODO:
>                      There exists some HTTP-functionality, but it is quite
>                      limited.
>                  </s>
> +                <s id="git">
> +                    Good.  Uses HTTPS (with WebDAV) or ssh for push,
> +                    HTTP, FTP, ssh or custom protocol for fetch.
> +                </s>

You forgot bundles (aka SneakerNet).
Again, compared to everyone else it is "vastly superior" :)

>                  <s id="mercurial">
>                      Excellent.  Uses HTTP or ssh.  Remote access also
>                      works safely without locks over read-only network
> @@ -1203,6 +1266,10 @@ TODO:
>                      Very good. Supports many UNIXes, Mac OS X, and Windows,
>                      and is written in a portable language.
>                  </s>
> +                <s id="git">TO DO.
> +                    Good.  Portable across all POSIX systems.
> +                    There exists Win32 binary using MinGW.
> +                </s>

"binaries": MinGW and Cygwin. And it is definitely "excellent" by the
standards of the site.