Debian Administration

Although in practice I still have a master location I push to, and it is operated in a centralized fashion!

Steve

CVS❣

My two penn'orth: distributed version control is a *contradiction in terms*. The whole point of source control is to create a single definition of what you've got and put it under the control of whoever's paying for it. What's more, everybody who's using git or the like is using it in a centralised way, but paying the price of not using a system that was designed to be used that way. Like clients having to pull the entire history when all they want is to build it, the insane policy of telling coders to rewrite history, and needing things like Android's repo scripts to do what the distributed version control system considers old fashioned. I honestly don't understand how the first beer mat that idea was scribbled on made it home from the pub. For me the only candidates are Perforce and Clearcase. It's a shame that no GPL SW can keep up with either of those, but I blame that fact on the outbreak of this distributed madness and peoples' tendency to run with the herd.

"Distributed" doesn't mean you don't have a central repo. It simply means that any node holds a copy of the code. With a centralized system, you never keep a local copy of your repo: you simply have a copy of you code, which means, when offline, you don't have version control. A distributed system is a peer-to-peer system: every node holds a full copy of the repo, with full commit ability/history, and any node can become the "master", if so desired.

So, distributed vs centralized is different from "with a master repo vs no central/master repo"... :)