Revisions to I'm a Subversion geek, why should I consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS?

Added a link to a presentation/tutorial I just authored

Source Link

edited Dec 19, 2012 at 8:21

added 222 characters in body

Source Link

edited Feb 3, 2012 at 0:30

You don't depend on a server and a connection, meaning faster times.
Not being slave to places where you can get internet access (or a VPN) just to be able to commit.

Everyone has a backup of everything (files, history), not just the server. Meaning anyone can become the server.
You can commit compulsively if you need to without messing others' code. Commits are local. You don't step on each other's toes while committing. You don't break other's builds or environments just by committing.
People without "commit access" can commit (because commiting in a DVCS does not imply uploading code), lowering barrier for contributions, you can decide to pull their changes or not as an integrator.
It can reinforce natural communication since a DVCS makes this essential... in subversion what you have instead are commit races, which force communication, but by obstructing your work.
Contributors can team up and handle their own merging, meaning less work for integrators in the end.
Contributors can have their own branches without affecting others' (but being able to share them if necessary).

You don't depend on a server and a connection, meaning faster times.
Everyone has a backup of everything (files, history), not just the server. Meaning anyone can become the server.
You can commit compulsively if you need to without messing others' code. Commits are local.
People without "commit access" can commit (because commiting in a DVCS does not imply uploading code), lowering barrier for contributions, you can decide to pull their changes or not as an integrator.
It can reinforce natural communication since a DVCS makes this essential... in subversion what you have instead are commit races, which force communication, but by obstructing your work.
Contributors can team up and handle their own merging, meaning less work for integrators in the end.
Contributors can have their own branches without affecting others' (but being able to share them if necessary).

You don't depend on a server and a connection, meaning faster times.
Not being slave to places where you can get internet access (or a VPN) just to be able to commit.

Everyone has a backup of everything (files, history), not just the server. Meaning anyone can become the server.
You can commit compulsively if you need to without messing others' code. Commits are local. You don't step on each other's toes while committing. You don't break other's builds or environments just by committing.
People without "commit access" can commit (because commiting in a DVCS does not imply uploading code), lowering barrier for contributions, you can decide to pull their changes or not as an integrator.
It can reinforce natural communication since a DVCS makes this essential... in subversion what you have instead are commit races, which force communication, but by obstructing your work.
Contributors can team up and handle their own merging, meaning less work for integrators in the end.
Contributors can have their own branches without affecting others' (but being able to share them if necessary).