Hacker News Reader

Comment by thewebcount | Hacker News Reader

My suggestion would be to not learn git. Go with just about any other version control system if you’re not using it professionally. I’ve used cvs, Subversion (svn), Perforce (p4), and others. Honestly, Subversion and Perforce were both significantly easier to setup, learn, and use than git. While they all have their growing pains, it took me about a week to get used to Perforce. It took me more like a month or two to get used to svn. I’ve been using git for years and still find it very hard to use and strongly dislike interacting with it.

View on HN

I second Subversion - though only because it is the closest to an open source alternative to Perforce. Otherwise it has a bunch of problems, like three separate half-baked implementations for shelving and aside from TortoiseSVN every other GUI front end has been either abandoned or on life support with a bunch of bugs.

But unless you have to work with other people in places like github, etc, it beats having to bother with git - especially for games that have a ton of binary files (which, unlike what some people will tell you, you want to have both version controlled and in the same repository).

Hell, if you really want a DVCS go with something like Fossil, it is still much easier than git, simpler to setup (just a single binary) and has more features (wiki, bug tracker, forum, etc) that you will find useful anyway.

Though personally the best experience i had with VCS is with Perforce, at least in gamedev: check out the latest version, merge any local changes, make modifications in a changelist, shelve the changelist in case i want to stop working on something and work on something else, use the shelve to send a WiP version to a coworker to merge with his changes (or see if things work as expected) or for code review, etc.

Sadly Perforce seems to be bound in a company that tries to sqeeze it for all its worth, adding a bunch of stuff of questionable usefulness, etc. It'd be nice if there was an open source alternative to it that allowed for the same or very similar workflows, all the issues i had with P4 over the years (e.g. merges between streams) were due to how P4 seems to be implemented, not due to anything inherent in the workflows themselves. There is no reason for an alternative to copy all the bugs.

Hard disagree. Subversion is awfully complex compared to git.

Yes, Subversion is initially easier to learn and use than git. It's not easier to set up as it's client-server while git is fully local. Also Subversion is an incongruous mess.

Subversion's CLI is actually sane and much easier compared to the abomination provided by Git. Additionally, Subversion can be used entirely locally, without the need to deploy and configure any server application.

It seems that you are comparing apples to oranges. Building your own SVN server from the ground up can indeed require some effort. Doing the same for Git demands more or less the same level of effort on your part. So, I believe you are comparing building an SVN server from the ground up to something like installing Gitea or GitLab, or using Git locally.

Again, you don’t have to install an SVN server. Just run `svnadmin create REPONAME` and use the `svn` client to import your data into the repository.

You don't have to set up a database for Git, either, and it works entirely locally. Git init, edit or copy in some files, git add, git commit, boom you're done. Optionally add a remote, push to the remote, pull from the remote if needed. If you're working alone, as I do, this is about 95% of the Git I need. Occasionally I clone to a different machine, or use Working Copy on iOS.

So? You've just described exactly the what's achievable with Subversion. The only missing part is adding remote repositories.

> You don't have to set up a database for Git, either, and it works entirely locally.

What database? Subversion doesn't need any special database to work. Just the repository and its working copy. Both can be local and can be created with two commands.

You're just talking past each other. You were responding initially to another user saying Subversion needs a server, and you responded that it doesn't. A different user responded, thinking your statement meant that you thought Git needed a server.

I disagree (with your advice, not your experience). I'm a total amateur and use Git for versioning prose. It is the only SCM that I can easily use across multiple devices and platforms. I don't use it for complex operations, mostly clone, commit, pull, push, branch now and then. I taught myself to use it from the command line. I guess being curious and persistent helped me get to whatever minimal level of utility I have with it.

I like Perforce it is fairly easy to use.

If you want to go old school there is RCS or SCCS. GNU provides source code (for SCCS there called CSSC). Though *CS are per file not per logical commit.

IIRC Perforce actually used RCS under the covers for storing the deltas.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com