Re: What a modern collaboration toolkit looks like

[David Kastrup]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     > It sounds like "git push" is the real analogue of CVS commit,
>
>     No.  Pushing works between repositories.  It is the way to propagate
>     changes to others.
>
> At this level, that's just a detail.  The must important thing about
> CVS commit is that it alters what other people will get if they ask to
> get the current version from the repository.  With git, the operation
> which does that is `push'.

Not really.  The atomic operation changing a repository is a commit
which is a commented and registered snapshot of a complete work tree
with a pointer to its parent commit (or in the case of a merge, all of
its parents).  And a commit may make it into a repository rather
equivalently by doing a commit from a work directory, by applying a
patch or patch series, or by pushing/pulling between repositories.

>     >           CVS           GIT
>     >           save file  =  commit
>
>     No.  Saving a file will not give you all the version control history and
>     tools and diffs and branching and other tools that committing does under
>     git.
>
> Ok, but those are details.  The crucial point is that saving a file,
> or git commit, alters your own data only; it does not affect what
> other users will get from the published repository.

Unless your "own data" _is_ the published repository.  Which is pretty
common the case for projects with an official repository controlled by
one or few persons, like the Linux kernel.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum