Home/ Questions/Q 6354435
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-24T22:34:31+00:00

As I getting acquainted with Git, I feel more and more that: Git and

  • 0

As I getting acquainted with Git, I feel more and more that:

Git and other DVCS jump a step futher than traditional centralized VCS in that they not only check out files in question, but also the
whole version database.

I think this is the major difference between DVCS and CVCS, and also the major foothold of all other benefits of DVCS.

Or, let’s put it this way:

Multiple Local VCS + A Centralized Backup = DVCS.

Changed the above equation to this:

Multiple Local Clones + A Centralized Backup = DVCS.

Right?

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    What you are describing is the very nature of a distributed system: the whole repository is cloned (with its full history).

    a DVCS mixes version control (branching and labels) with publication (push/pull to/from remote repo)

    But there are other characteristics that differentiate a DVCS from CVCS.
    Especially in terms of workflow. See “Describe your workflow of using version control (VCS or DVCS)“

    And don’t forget that a DVCS doesn’t have authorization or authentication. However, there are solutions to provide those, e.g. apache2-authn-redmine in combination with the Redmine Project Management System

    The OP smwikipedia adds:

    Multiple Local VCS + A Centralized Backup = DVCS.

    I don’t think you can summarize that way, especially considering it would be difficult to emulate the push/pull features since most of the VCS (SVN, ClearCase, Perforce, …) have no “local” repo, only local working spaces, and depend heavily on their central repo.

    • 0