[EM] Election method simulator code - revision control

[Michael Allan]

Yes, Git differs in the structure of its network.  Git's network is
distributed wheras Subversion's is centralized:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revision_control#Distributed_revision_control

The most interesting consequence is political.  The authors in a
distributed network require no permission from any authority in order
to collaborate on the text (source code or whatever) that is under
revision control.  They can join the network without anybody's say-so,
because it is maintained entirely by author-peers.

-- 
Michael Allan
 
Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
http://zelea.com/


Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
> Michael Allan wrote:
> > I don't know if it's helpful information, but Mercurial and Git are
> > functionally very similar.  There isn't much to choose between them.
> > I never understood why Torvalds and crew bothered coding Git in the
> > first place.  I use Mercurial.
> > 
> > There's a bunch of hosting sites for both tools, but you don't really
> > need them.  Distributed revision control is logically peer to peer.
> > It doesn't depend on central sites.  As long as you have upload access
> > to an ordinary Web server, you can share your code with anyone (even
> > on the hosting sites) just by posting your repo.  Here are my own
> > repos, for example: http://zelea.com/var/db/repo/
> 
> I think I'll keep the current setup for now, though. The hosting sites 
> seem to give additional tools to make it easier to coordinate, report 
> and fix bugs, document, and so on. If I grow out of the hosting site, 
> I'll consider moving elsewhere, but there's no risk of that yet :-)
> 
> As for Github vs Google, I haven't thought much about it. I pretty much 
> just picked a reasonably well known hosting site. Is Git very different 
> from svn?