On 26/06/2008 12:03, Marc Haisenko wrote:
> On Thursday 26 June 2008, Mike Williams wrote:
>> Sorry to rain on the git love fest going on but ...
>>
>> There are other options.  There is no killer reason to use git over the
>> other systems, and the need for a Cygwin base system for windows does
>> raise the bar for Windows users - not everyone will want to have to
>> install and maintain a Unix like command system just to use a source
>> control system.  It would be nice to have a reasoned review of the
>> options for Vim development.
>>
>> Mercurial is widely used, with a possible plus of svn like command
>> interface.  Bzr is also good, if not so widely used.  IIRC there has
>> been a recent SVN release that supports disconnected working (one of the
>> big selling points of DVCSs) so perhaps that should not be discounted
>> just yet.
> 
> I don't know what "disconnected working" should mean, but SubVersion was 
> designed to have as few talking to the server as possible.
> 
> But if you like to do stuff like checking in and so on without being 
> connected 
> to the "real" server then there's always SVK, which is a special SubVersion 
> client. AFAIK there's nothing you need to do to your server to make it work.
> 
> SubVersion has the "disadvantage" of being a centralized VCS while Bazaar, 
> GIT 
> and Mercurial are decentralized. But the advantages of SubVersion are that 
> CVS users will propably have few trouble adapting to SubVersion (that was one 
> of the design goals), there a clients for all major OS's out there (even 
> OS/390), and there are even several GUIs for Windows, Mac and Unix. I think 
> by now all Linux distros contain SubVersion (all 1.x clients are guaranteed 
> to be able to speak with all 1.x servers) and there are pre-compiled packages 
> for Mac and Windows.
> 
> A major downside of SubVersion has been the missing merge-tracking but 
> SubVersion 1.5.0 which is out for a week or so has finally closed that gap 
> (AFAIK there are still corner-cases that aren't handled as elegant as the SVN 
> developers want it to be, but for the majority of people the current state of 
> merge tracking in SVN should be working just fine).

My apologies, this was what I was thinking of and got wrong.  Obviously 
an issue when many developers are using SVK.

> With cvs2svn it's possible to migrate an existing CVS repository to 
> SubVersion.
> 
> I like SVN because it's rock-solid. I use it at home and we are using it in 
> our company for about 6 years now. And if it's good enough for KDE and GCC 
> which are really huge projects than it should be good enough for mere mortals 
> as well ;-)
> 
> That being said, which VCS to use really depends on your target audience and 
> how you want to work. There's a very nice page summarizing all kind of 
> aspects of various VCS systems:
> 
> http://better-scm.berlios.de/comparison/comparison.html
> 
> Bye,
>       Marc
> 

Mike
-- 
If all of the electricity goes back out through the other wire, why do I 
have to pay for it?

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Raspunde prin e-mail lui