I use git for all my personal projects and use git syncing to a subversion server at work. For my needs I find it pretty easy to use and not much different to subversion though merging and branching and the like work in a nicer way in my opinion.
On 11 February 2010 22:17, Ralph Corderoy <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > > I'd be interested to hear of any list members' version control > > software experiences. As a long time CVS'er who's realised that it > > looks to be heading towards extinction, I've been looking at the > > latest generation of distributed VC systems. Initial experimentation > > with Git haven't been encouraging - changes pushed to a remote > > repository with a working copy end up getting creamed, which appeared > > to be such utterly broken behaviour for a DVCS (or any VCS) that I'm > > surprised it's gained as much traction as it has (Googling around, > > plenty of others seem equally incredulous at this feature). I've a bit > > of experience with Subversion, but hanging around for an hour for > > repository updates, as a result of tags resulting in full-blown > > copies, pushed me towards DVCS's. Currently exploring Mercurial as a > > possible worthy alternative to Git - any user feedback on these or any > > others (Bazaar, Monotone, Darcs etc) much appreciated. > > I've gone the SCCS, RCS, CVS, Subversion, Darcs, Bazaar route over the > years, with dalliances off to others like git. > > I'm very happy with Bazaar. The command line interface is nice and > clean; well-thought out. It's flexible as a DVCS in working in > different ways. The source is Python, which has a reputation for being > easy to read, so dipping in isn't hard. Decent documentation. > Canonical have invested a lot in it; it's heavily used in Launchpad and > during Ubuntu preparation, so it's not going to fade rapidly in the > future. And the user community is friendly. There's steady development > and performance is good for my uses and improving; Canonical's own > needs ensure that. > > I've only used Mercurial when dealing with repos that use it, so can't > comment there. > > I found git showed its `cobbled together over time' design as far as the > UI was concerned. I don't need to see such ugliness on a daily basis so > moved on once I understood it. :-) > > Darcs is interesting, partially because it's written in Haskell, > partially because of the model for handling patches the author's come up > with. But I think you'd be a bit isolated if using it, and life's too > short, so I wanted something more mainstream. > > Cheers, > Ralph. > > > -- > Next meeting: Dorchester, Tue 2010-03-02 20:00 > http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=2645413 > Chat: http://www.mibbit.com/?server=irc.blitzed.org&channel=%23dorset > List info: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dorset > -- Andrew Montgomery-Hurrell Professional Geek Blog: http://darkliquid.co.uk Twitter: http://twitter.com/darkliquid Fiction: http://www.protagonize.com/author/darkliquid -- Next meeting: Dorchester, Tue 2010-03-02 20:00 http://dorset.lug.org.uk/ http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=2645413 Chat: http://www.mibbit.com/?server=irc.blitzed.org&channel=%23dorset List info: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/dorset
