Is git with cvs faster than cvs alone?

I use Git as a Subversion client on a large project (on the order of 10k files). Git is fast, really fast. It's so fast that I only keep one working clone, and switch between feature branches within that same clone.

Like you, when I used Subversion I would have two or three similar checkouts and would switch between them regularly as I had multiple things in progress simultaneously. It got to be pretty confusing sometimes. With Git's features like lightweight branches, the stash, and "git add -p", I find that I no longer need multiple checkouts.

I can do everything in one directory, and not worry as much about losing changes that I either forgot about or accidentally overwrote I haven't used Git with CVS, but if its integration is anything like git-svn then it's going to be no problem.

I use Git as a Subversion client on a large project (on the order of 10k files). Git is fast, really fast. It's so fast that I only keep one working clone, and switch between feature branches within that same clone.

Like you, when I used Subversion I would have two or three similar checkouts and would switch between them regularly as I had multiple things in progress simultaneously. It got to be pretty confusing sometimes. With Git's features like lightweight branches, the stash, and "git add -p", I find that I no longer need multiple checkouts.

I can do everything in one directory, and not worry as much about losing changes that I either forgot about or accidentally overwrote. I haven't used Git with CVS, but if its integration is anything like git-svn then it's going to be no problem.

We do something similar at work. We basically use the master branch in git as a single, updated CVS version of the code; we don't do any development there, just CVS updates. Then, all of our development projects happen on feature branches that we rebase.

When we do CVS updates on the master branch we commit those changes to master and then rebase our other development branches against master. It's not ideal -- it makes sharing branches with other people difficult. But, we can manage several development projects at once and do branches, merges, and diffs against them easily.

And, we only interact with CVS on the one master branch, as needed.

Sounds pretty good. Is the rebase step faster than the cvs up? – Craig P.

Motlin Nov 26 '08 at 17:20 Yeah, it's a ton faster because it's all local. It basically generates diffs from your branch and applies them to the new head of the branch. – Pat Notz Nov 26 '08 at 17:58.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.