X-Git-Url: https://sipb.mit.edu/gitweb.cgi/ikiwiki.git/blobdiff_plain/253c4a9acc4c1cde24a6c63aab88447dbc293756..0ff488e3807aa9a1b21033f33b236ad06ff9bdbb:/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
index ea7a9ac89..1aafd4a8e 100644
--- a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
+++ b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@
-## A few bits about the RCS backends
+# A few bits about the RCS backends
 
-### Terminology
+## Terminology
 
 ``web-edit'' means that a page is edited by using the web (CGI) interface
 as opposed to using a editor and the RCS interface.
 
 
-### [[Subversion]]
+## [[Subversion]]
 
 Subversion was the first RCS to be supported by ikiwiki.
 
-#### How does it work internally?
+### How does it work internally?
 
 Master repository M.
 
@@ -28,12 +28,12 @@ see [[commit-internals]].
 You browse and web-edit the wiki on W.
 
 
-### [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)
+## [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)
 
 Support for using darcs as a backend is being worked on by [Thomas
 Schwinge](mailto:tschwinge@gnu.org).
 
-#### How will it work internally?
+### How will it work internally?
 
 ``Master'' repository R1.
 
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ separated parts in ikiwiki.
 
 What repository should [[RecentChanges]] and [[History]] work on?  R1?
 
-##### Rationale for doing it differently than in the Subversion case
+#### Rationale for doing it differently than in the Subversion case
 
 darcs is a distributed RCS, which means that every checkout of a
 repository is equal to the repository it was checked-out from.  There is
@@ -74,3 +74,19 @@ doesn't really differ from the other checkouts that people will branch
 off from R1.
 
 (To be continued.)
+
+
+## [[Git]]
+
+Regarding the Git support, Recai says:
+
+I have been testing it for the past few days and it seems satisfactory.  I
+haven't observed any race condition regarding the concurrent blog commits
+and it handles merge conflicts gracefully as far as I can see.
+
+As you may notice from the patch size, GIT support is not so trivial to
+implement (for me, at least).  Being a fairly fresh code base it has some
+bugs.  It also has some drawbacks (especially wrt merge which was the hard
+part).  GIT doesn't have a similar functionality like 'svn merge -rOLD:NEW
+FILE' (please see the relevant comment in mergepast for more details), so I
+had to invent an ugly hack just for the purpose.