分布式版本控制系统会生存吗？
我个人是 SVN 爱好者，但我开始成为围绕 DVCS 的热门话题的牺牲品。
SVN 是免费的，并且经过时间考验，DVCS 是新的 SVN 吗？
我也在寻找哪个 DVCS 服务器将胜出 GIT 或 Mercurial？
I am personally a SVN lover, but am starting to fall prey to the buzz that is surrounding DVCS.
SVN is free, and time tested, is DVCS the new SVN?
I am also looking for which DVCS server will win out GIT or Mercurial?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（5）
好吧，你可以在wiki上看看优点和缺点
差异
[编辑]
优点
[编辑]
缺点
但最终我相信这将归结为公司使用什么。看看COBOL，它仍然在很多地方使用，尽管它已经教授了这么多。已经实施此功能的公司很可能会保留现有的内容，而不是改变一切以适应新的炒作。国际海事组织。
Well you can look at the advantage and disadvantages on wiki
Differences
[edit]
Advantages
[edit]
Disadvantages
however in the end I believe what it would come down to is what companies use what. Look at COBOL, it is still used in a lot of places even though it's even taught that much anymore. Companies that already have this implemented will most likely stay with what they have instead of changing everything to accommodate the new hype. IMO.
分布式源代码控制很棒，但它实际上取决于您正在从事的项目类型。大多数公司需要一个集中存储库作为每个人都可以参考的点。因此，当您查看像 GIT 或 Mercurial 这样的工具时……对于大公司来说，重要的卖点并不是“分布式”（尽管因此有一些细节，但这不是最重要的）。它们的美妙之处在于它们使合并分支变得更加容易。与“集中式”系统相比，这使您能够更频繁、更有效地进行分支，并提交更多的中间步骤。是的，这些很大程度上是由于它们是在分布式模型中设计的，但也不完全如此。我个人喜欢 GIT……但我将它与集中式“存储库”一起用于工作，因为这对业务有意义。
就免费而言，这并不是真正的问题。大多数（如果不是全部）分布式源代码控制系统都是免费的。只有时间才能告诉我们谁“胜出”，但如果我必须下注，我会说两者都不是。有数十种 SCM 都同样失败，并且有数千家公司使用它们中的每一种。
Distributed Source Control is great, however it really depends on what kind of project you're working on. Most companies need a centralized repository as a point that everyone can reference. So when you are looking at tools like GIT or Mercurial..it isn't the "Distributed" that is the important sell for a big company (although there are niceties because of this, this is not the most important thing). The beauty of them is the fact that they make merging branches much easier. This causes you to be able to branch more often and effectively, and commit at more intermediate steps than you would on a "centralized" system. Yes, these are largely due to the fact that they are designed in a distributed model, but not entirely so. I personally love GIT...but I use it with a centralized "repository" for work because it's what makes sense for the business.
As far as being free, that's not really an issue. Most (if not all) Distributed source control systems are free. Only time will tell who "wins out" but if I had to place my bet, I'd say neither. There are dozens of SCM out there that all fail equally, and thousands of companies use each of them.
我认为我们不会很快看到中型或大型公司放弃集中式系统。大公司关心集中化和控制。他们有治理和合规问题需要处理，并且需要集中化来管理。因此，我认为您将继续在企业中看到集中式系统。
与此同时，DVCS 很可能会主导开源生态系统。随着最近 Git 的流行以及 Microsoft 在 Codeplex 上支持 Mercurial，我们已经看到了这一点。
就我个人而言，我很乐意看到一种组合。我认为用于跟踪“官方”存储库的集中式服务器将在企业环境中有所帮助，但是允许单个开发人员进行廉价分支和合并的分布式工作副本将非常有用。
前几天我在博客中专门讨论了 Subversion。我不确定我们有多大可能会看到来自 SVN 团队的类似产品，但我认为它可能非常强大。
http://www.sublimesvn.com /blog/2010/03/subversion-vision-conference-distributed-subversion-unlikel/
I don't think we'll see medium or large companies move away from centralized systems any time soon. Large companies care about centralization and control. They have governance and compliance issues to deal with and they need centralization to manage that. So I think you'll continue to see centralized systems in the enterprise.
At the same time, DVCS will most likely dominate the open source ecosystem. We're already seeing this with the recent rise in popularity of Git and Microsoft supporting Mercurial on codeplex.
Personally I would love to see a combination. I think a centralized server for tracking "official" repositories would help in an enterprise environment, but a distributed working copy allowing cheap branching and merging for individual developers would be very useful.
I blogged about this the other day specifically in regards to Subversion. I'm not sure how likely it is that we'll see anything like this come from the SVN team, but I think it could be really powerful.
http://www.sublimesvn.com/blog/2010/03/subversion-vision-conference-distributed-subversion-unlikel/
我所知道的每个分布式版本控制系统也是免费的。分布式系统提供了如此多的好处，我认为真正的问题是传统系统是否能够生存。我对此的回答是否定的。
Every distributed version control system that I know of is also free. Distributed systems offer so many benefits, that I think the real question is whether traditional systems will survive. My answer to that is no.
Git 和 Mercurial 哪个会胜出？双方都会“赢”。
它们的使用非常相似。学习 Git 或 Mercurial 的人可以轻松地从一种切换到另一种，只需要学习如何以不同的方式表达某些命令。 （最大的区别在于高级用法）。
它们是可互操作的。您可以在 Mercurial 和 Git 存储库之间推送数据而不会丢失信息。
没有真正令人信服的理由从 Git 切换到 Mercurial，反之亦然。
两者都不比另一个更受欢迎。 Google 返回“git dvcs”的 494k 结果，“mercurial dvcs”返回 342k 结果。 Bzr 有 173k，Darcs 有 51k。
Which will win, Git or Mercurial? Both will "win".
They are very similar in use. People who learn Git or Mercurial can easily switch from one to the other, only having to learn how to word some commands differently. (The biggest differences lie in advanced usage).
They are interoperable. You can push data between Mercurial and Git repositories without losing information.
There's no real compelling reason to switch from Git to Mercurial or vice versa.
Neither is much more popular than the other. Google returns 494k results for "git dvcs", and 342k results for "mercurial dvcs". Bzr has 173k and Darcs has 51k.