Is Subversion better at cherry-picking then git (or any DAG VCS)?

I just read and seems that svn:mergeinfo can track info about single commit merge which happen at cherry-picking.

That avoid merge conflict when you merge back your feature-branch with cherry-picked bug-fixes to original branch (where you made bug-fixes before).

  • Incremental linearizing of git DAG
  • If merging is represented by a DAG in git, why is the git log linear?
  • Pretty git branch graphs
  • Git history graph compared to SVN history graph
  • DAG-oriented git browser?
  • Here funny ASCII art (which people like at SO):

          o--o--o--o--o    feature
         ^      ^      \
        /      /        v
    -o--o--o--X--o---o---Y--o-->  dev

    Here X – only single changeset (essential/blocker fix that we move from dev to feature branch).

    I try and found that Git have conflicts in Y merge if you have made changes at lines which effected by fix X already. While SVN just skip that changeset from merge.

    UPDATE That leads DAG VCS users to use bisect and аштв common ancestor from bisect and branches for fix propagation. So you can make clean history.

  • git-svn-rebase is commiting to an SVN tag
  • git rebase on other branch
  • Push to Remote URL with TortoiseGit
  • Git - Remove file from .git folder without removing it remotely
  • Gradle: add dependency to github project to dev branch instead of master
  • How to run Git 1.6.x for Windows from a USB memory stick
  • One Solution collect form web for “Is Subversion better at cherry-picking then git (or any DAG VCS)?”

    You may want to read up on rerere, which is short for “reuse recorded resolution”. Git can remember how you resolved conflicts in the past and reuse those resolutions later, but you have to enable the feature.

    git config rerere.enabled true will enable this feature in your repository (or use --global if you want to enable it by default on this machine for this user).

    Git Baby is a git and github fan, let's start git clone.