As Clemens Koller wrote: > Well, regarding Mercurial that is (or was?) a matter of the > licensing...
Politics. :) For a VCS, I wouldn't care much, as long as its license doesn't try to dictate anything about the source code I'm going to shuffle into it. savannah.nongnu.org offers CVS, SVN, Git, Mercurial, and Bazaar, so this would have been the set of possible choices. > I just see the thousands of repos moved over to Git now. It's > free and cross platform (msysgit). I think many (all?) of them are. > > SVN is at least a logical choice as it comes with the smallest set > > of differences compared to CVS, so the amount of things to learn > > anew for developers who are used to CVS is fairly small. > Yes, it's almost the same thing (from my point of view). It's only the same thing in that it is a centralized VCS, rather than a distributed one. It has built on dozens of years of CVS experience, so it could avoid many of the smaller annoyances that eventually showed up in CVS. From a user's point of view, there are only few differences so the transition is fairly smooth. The major difference is the different handling of branches/tags, as they are a repository copy operation now, but we just decided against maintaining a branch a few weeks ago, and release tagging is usually only my job, so the normal end-user won't notice those differences at all. -- cheers, J"org .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) _______________________________________________ AVR-libc-dev mailing list AVR-libc-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
