我会设置一个Subversion存储库。通过这种方式，个人开发人员可以选择是使用Subversion客户机还是Git客户机(使用Git -svn)。使用Git -svn不能为您提供完整Git解决方案的所有好处，但它确实为单个开发人员提供了对自己的工作流的大量控制。

我相信Git在Windows上的表现会在相对较短的时间内达到在Unix和Mac OS X上的效果(既然你问了)。

Subversion为Windows提供了出色的工具，例如用于浏览器集成的TortoiseSVN和用于Visual Studio集成的AnkhSVN。

在做了更多的研究，并查看了这个链接:https://git.wiki.kernel.org/articles/g/i/t/GitSvnComparison_cb82.html

(摘录如下):

It's incredibly fast. No other SCM that I have used has been able to keep up with it, and I've used a lot, including Subversion, Perforce, darcs, BitKeeper, ClearCase and CVS. It's fully distributed. The repository owner can't dictate how I work. I can create branches and commit changes while disconnected on my laptop, then later synchronize that with any number of other repositories. Synchronization can occur over many media. An SSH channel, over HTTP via WebDAV, by FTP, or by sending emails holding patches to be applied by the recipient of the message. A central repository isn't necessary, but can be used. Branches are even cheaper than they are in Subversion. Creating a branch is as simple as writing a 41 byte file to disk. Deleting a branch is as simple as deleting that file. Unlike Subversion branches carry along their complete history. without having to perform a strange copy and walk through the copy. When using Subversion I always found it awkward to look at the history of a file on branch that occurred before the branch was created. from #git: spearce: I don't understand one thing about SVN in the page. I made a branch i SVN and browsing the history showed the whole history a file in the branch Branch merging is simpler and more automatic in Git. In Subversion you need to remember what was the last revision you merged from so you can generate the correct merge command. Git does this automatically, and always does it right. Which means there's less chance of making a mistake when merging two branches together. Branch merges are recorded as part of the proper history of the repository. If I merge two branches together, or if I merge a branch back into the trunk it came from, that merge operation is recorded as part of the repostory history as having been performed by me, and when. It's hard to dispute who performed the merge when it's right there in the log. Creating a repository is a trivial operation: mkdir foo; cd foo; git init That's it. Which means I create a Git repository for everything these days. I tend to use one repository per class. Most of those repositories are under 1 MB in disk as they only store lecture notes, homework assignments, and my LaTeX answers. The repository's internal file formats are incredible simple. This means repair is very easy to do, but even better because it's so simple its very hard to get corrupted. I don't think anyone has ever had a Git repository get corrupted. I've seen Subversion with fsfs corrupt itself. And I've seen Berkley DB corrupt itself too many times to trust my code to the bdb backend of Subversion. Git's file format is very good at compressing data, despite it's a very simple format. The Mozilla project's CVS repository is about 3 GB; it's about 12 GB in Subversion's fsfs format. In Git it's around 300 MB.

在阅读了所有这些之后，我确信Git是可行的方法(尽管存在一点学习曲线)。我也在Windows平台上使用过Git和SVN。

我很想听听其他人在读完上面的文章后会怎么说?

If your team is already familiar with version and source control softwares like cvs or svn, then, for a simple and small project (such as you claim it is), I would recommend you stick to SVN. I am really comfortable with svn, but for the current e-commerce project I am doing on django, I decided to work on git (I am using git in svn-mode, that is, with a centralised repo that I push to and pull from in order to collaborate with at least one other developer). The other developer is comfortable with SVN, and while others' experiences may differ, both of us are having a really bad time embracing git for this small project. (We are both hardcore Linux users, if it matters at all.)

当然，你的里程可能会有所不同。

我已经使用SVN很长时间了，但是每当我使用Git时，我都觉得Git非常强大，轻量级，尽管有一点学习曲线，但它比SVN要好。

我所注意到的是，每个SVN项目，随着它的发展，都会变成一个非常大的项目，除非它被导出。其中，GIT项目(以及GIT数据)的大小非常轻。

在SVN中，我与从新手到专家的开发人员都打过交道，如果新手和中级开发人员为了重用一个文件夹而从另一个SVN项目复制文件夹，他们似乎会引入文件冲突。然而，我认为在Git中，你只需要复制文件夹就可以了，因为Git没有在所有子文件夹中引入. Git文件夹(就像SVN那样)。

在很长一段时间内处理了大量的SVN之后，我终于考虑将我和我的开发人员转移到Git，因为它很容易协作和合并工作，还有一个很大的优势是，本地副本的更改可以根据需要提交，然后最终推送到服务器上的分支，而不像SVN(我们必须不时地在服务器上的存储库中提交更改)。

谁能帮我决定我是否真的应该使用Git?

我会选择SVN，因为它传播更广泛，知名度更高。

我想Git更适合Linux用户。

你必须使用DVCS，它就像源代码管理的一个量子飞跃。就我个人而言，我使用Monotone和它加速的开发时间没有结束。我们在Windows、Linux和Mac上使用它，它非常稳定。我甚至让buildbot在每个平台上进行每晚的项目构建。

分布式DVCS通常意味着您将创建一个中央服务器，仅供人们推送更改。