Weird bug here. I’ve been locked with one main client for about 2 years, I’m losing my edge.
I’ve been suggesting, going as far a setting a demo system, that their document revision system be migrated from Rational ClearCase to GIT. The current setup support code (developers) and documentation (infrastructure, products, management teams).
Change rational: I don’t have anything specific against ClearCase, but their licences are ending and, as a corporate decision, they are looking into cutting recurring costs. Going for a widely deployed & supported open-source/free software solution looked like a safe bet. While not involved in the decision process, I suggested GIT as an alternative to whatever they could be thinking of. I’m that kind of ‘consultant’, always with an opinion on everything, hmm… computer related.
The bug is: Why the hell did I suggest GIT ? I’ve entered a weird mental pattern. Through the years, I’ve convinced myself that peoples would be supported by an outdated system (ie: CVS), then upgrade to a more recent one (ie: SVN), then change their ways to a true developer friendly revision control system (ie: GIT).
GIT and SVN aren’t the same type of product.
Sometimes, you DO need a central repository – mainly if all you are doing hard-to-merge binary file commit. Sometimes, you DO need a locking mechanism. Think of 10 employees working on different part of the same Visio document. A project complete and you get 10 ‘branch’ merge request ? You’ll want to kill yourself. At least with locking, they will fight amongst themselves!
But the GIT vs SVN vs ‘whatever‘ isn’t the point here. The problem was that I took a ready-made solution (that I deployed long ago) and went as far as proposed it ‘to the outside world’. That would have never happen while I was leading the infrastructure decisions of 5+ startup (and maintaining a lot more). I’m losing my edge. It’s time to start posting a bit more (on this blog) and bouncing ideas off my entourage.