Hi Ralph On 11/02/10 22:17, Ralph Corderoy 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.
Thanks for your feedback. Bazaar and Mercurial do seem pretty closely matched in terms in approach, features and user-friendliness. During my initial trawl the post at the end of http://jam-bazaar.blogspot.com/2007/10/bazaar-vs-subversion.html had made me wonder, but his comments are probably down to a misunderstanding in usage. > > 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. :-) Nicely put! > > 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. > Again I'm coming to the same conclusions. Both Darcs and Monotone seem to be worthy contenders, but adopting any new tool involves a fair bit of learning, so choosing the most widely used makes sense. I'll give bzr and hg a workout over the next few weeks and then choose the one I prefer. Cheers Tim -- 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
