For programmers, version control is an indispensable component of any workflow. Whether you’re working on a simple app that necessitates manual management of code changes, or a complex project with numerous branches and sub-branches that need to be monitored, familiarity with various version control systems is imperative. An ability to effortlessly manoeuvre version control is an integral part of achieving success as a developer.
There’s little room for debate when it comes to the advantages of having a clear understanding of code modifications’ timing and authorship, as it can help pinpoint the origin of issues during debugging and prevent unintentional overwriting of colleagues’ work by developers. In essence, utilising a version control system can be immensely helpful in maintaining code organisation.
This remains true for development teams, whether they work on-site or off-site. A version control system is a prerequisite regardless of your team’s location.
Despite the numerous advantages of version control systems (VCS), there are a few factors to consider when using them remotely. In this series, we have investigated multiple technologies, and this article aims to specify the pros and cons of the most popular VCS. Without further ado, let’s delve into the particulars.
Subversion (or SVN), a version control system (VCS), was created by CollabNet and is distributed by the Apache Software Foundation. It is an open-source software that is free of charge, due to the Apache license that permits its distribution.
In Subversion (SVN), using atomic operations guarantees that all alterations are either applied completely or entirely undone. This is highly advantageous in the case of a disconnection or any other interruption, preventing code from being corrupted due to an unfinished update. Moreover, it allows for code accessibility to developers worldwide and offers a convenient approach to code sharing and collaboration.
During the initial days of Version Control Systems (VCSs), developers lacked the ability to view modifications made by other developers, which could prevent disputes but also resulted in crucial parts of the code being unavailable for an extended period.
Subversion (SVN) utilises a mechanism called “merge-before-commit” to avoid locking. This technique merges changes made by developers into the primary repository, and if merging fails, the modified data will not be saved. This provides reassurance that code is safeguarded against the possibility of partial merging. For those who learn more efficiently via visual aids, this website may prove to be beneficial.
There are two major types of version control systems: centralised and distributed. Subversion (SVN) is a centralised system that is administered by a central authority. This guarantees that the codebase is stored in a single, trusted source, instilling confidence that the code is securely saved on the server.
The problem at hand is that if your server encounters downtime, your development team will become inactive. When thinking about global collaboration, it is crucial to ensure that your team has an always available, dependable internet connection. It is not satisfactory to merely guarantee server availability during standard business hours in your country; you must also permit access to employees located in different time zones.
If your development project can be divided into distinct, well-defined phases, Subversion (SVN) is an excellent option. However, when compared to newer solutions, its branch management abilities are significantly lacking.
Git is an innovative approach to software development as it employs a decentralised repository. Each developer has their own private repository that is continuously synchronised with the primary repository. In other words, remote teams can collaborate even if primary servers are inaccessible, as long as they are using Github or a comparable system.
Git, the open source version control system developed by the well-known Linux pioneer Linus Torvalds, is recognised for its remarkable transaction speed. This makes it a suitable option for remote teams seeking to reduce delays while saving files. The significant advantage of Git’s superior speed compared to its alternatives enables your team to be more efficient and productive with their work.
Git is modelled after the modular approach employed by Linux, where its features and functions are separated into smaller, more manageable programs. By doing so, Git can be tailored to meet the particular requirements of your organisation, and this approach also ensures that developers feel more at ease when working with it.
Individuals who are familiar with Subversion (SVN) may encounter difficulties when transitioning to Git, and it should be noted that Git has less official support on Windows compared to Linux.
Git uses a commit-before-merge methodology instead of a merge-before-commit one. To incorporate any submitted changes, a new branch will be formed by the repository. This new development direction can then either become the primary one or be allowed to exist separately as a new branch.
Git and Mercurial were created to compete against each other for the Linux Kernel development role, but eventually Git was selected. Mercurial’s release was only slightly postponed compared to Git, and despite not being chosen for the Linux job, it has still attained significant success.
Unlike its precursors, Mercurial was developed using the Python programming language, which allows it to be more accessible to Python developers. Consequently, they are more inclined to prefer Mercurial as their version control system. Additionally, Mercurial works with a distributed system, much like Git, providing assurance that the work is secure and will persist even if the primary repository is unavailable.
If your developers are already well-versed in Subversion (SVN), Mercurial might be a better choice because of its greater similarity to SVN. However, Mercurial has been criticised for not employing scripts and for its inability to merge parents, which may be discouraging for potential users.
Mercurial diverges from Subversion in the way it executes and logs commits. Like Git, Mercurial adheres to committing changes before merging. Despite having the smallest market share among the three version control systems we are discussing today, several major websites, such as Facebook, utilise it.
Revision Control and the Geographically Dispersed Team
If your team does not prefer the version control system (VCS) you have opted for, its technical capabilities become insignificant. While you may be capable of determining which VCS would best fit your project based on obtainable data, it is generally recommended to let those with the most negative opinion to have the final say. This is especially true if any of your team members hold a strong aversion towards either Subversion (SVN) or Git.
Despite practical considerations, a focus on theoretical aspects indicates that Git provides numerous benefits to remote teams. Mainly, its decentralised structure guarantees that each remote developer always has access to their own local copy, whether they are consistently connected or travelling without internet connectivity. Furthermore, we appreciate Github’s emphasis on asynchronous interaction, which is particularly advantageous for remote groups.
When remote developers regain contact with the outside world or your office servers are back online, Git will take care of any changes, ensuring that you have a fully up-to-date repository to operate with. Without a doubt, one of the most notable benefits of Git is its speed. The faster updates can be made while team members are transferring data over long distances, the better.
At Works, we are committed to aiding you in finding the ideal developer to bring your concepts to reality. Whether you want to alter an existing project or embark on something entirely new, our team of experts is available to help you. Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you require any assistance.