Comment by scotty79

> After years of using git I got back to svn

You get the best of both worlds--a sane set of commands and a distributed version control system--by using Mercurial [1].

Checking Status: SVN: svn status Mercurial: hg status

Adding Files: SVN: svn add <filename> Mercurial: hg add <filename>

Committing Changes: SVN: svn commit -m "Commit message" (commits changes directly to the central repository) Mercurial: hg commit -m "Commit message" (commits changes to the local repository) and hg push (sends local commits to a remote repository)

Deleting/Removing Files: SVN: svn delete <filename> or svn remove <filename> Mercurial: hg remove <filename> or hg rm <filename>

Viewing History: SVN: svn log Mercurial: hg log

Viewing Differences: SVN: svn diff Mercurial: hg diff

Branching: SVN: svn copy <source_URL> <destination_URL> (creates a branch by copying a directory in the repository) Mercurial: hg branch <branchname> (creates a new named branch within the repository)

Reverting Changes: SVN: svn revert <filename> (reverts local modifications) or svn merge -r <revision>:<revision> <URL> (for more complex reverts) Mercurial: hg revert <filename> (reverts local modifications) or hg backout <changeset> (to undo a specific commit)

[1]: https://www.mercurial-scm.org

One really nice thing about a distributed version control system is that it lets me as a developer make commits to track my work without having to push them to a central location and pollute the global commit history of the repository. I can modify my commit history (to clean it up and remove all of my failed experiments, for example) before I publish it, so to speak. Or I can completely remove my commits without publishing at all if what I was trying didn't pan out.

> I'm sure svn got decent merging.

That's definitely not my experience. SVN has merging, but I've found it extremely frustrating in a team context.