|
I used Git, CVS and Mercurial (Hg) before.
and I like Mercurial (Hg) more.
Mercurial (Hg) is more easy to handle.
|
|
|
|
|
Not really programming in high level last time, but when... I use to do backups each day with timestamp in name and a tiny explanation on what was going on that day. If I need more explanation then I add a tiny *.txt with what I need to save.
If I come back to high level end, I suppose I will have a look to those tools and pick one.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
you should use some scc to aquire the knowledge. I would recommand git
Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Why are there CVS and Mercurial in the list and Perforce is missing?
|
|
|
|
|
because perforce sucks.
and yes, i'm using it daily at my job - and hate every minute of it.
|
|
|
|
|
In comparison to ClearCase, it's a thing of mesmerizing beauty.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Because cr@p cannot be VCS.  Everybody who touched it, LEAVED it.
|
|
|
|
|
I use SVN but sometimes I thought...My source files are under control but my code is Out of Control 
Find More .Net development tips at : .NET Tips
The only reason people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVN is a document versioning system; it does not have the functionality required for code management.
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It does work pretty well, Ankh is also good!
Er, I can't think of a funny signature right now.
How about a good fart to break the silence?
|
|
|
|
|
My "Other" SCC system is Perforce. I'd rather use Git, but the PHB's at work have decreed that Perforce is our repository.
|
|
|
|
|
My project uses AccuRev which is a cousin of ClearCase. It allows a pretty good amount of flexibility.
|
|
|
|
|
If you listen to tech media you'd think that everyone uses Git, and a handful of us old coots still use SVN. I use both, but given the choice I choose SVN every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Yvan Rodrigues wrote: I use both, but given the choice I choose SVN every time.
Same here. Unfortunatelly, I seldom have a choice...
|
|
|
|
|
You put your finger on Git's success: GitHub.
GitHub is often chosen because it's easy. Setting up a new repo is trivial, and that's why both open-source and corporate users use it.
The closest thing to GitHub for SVN is SourceForge, I guess; maybe Google Code or CodePlex. None of these are as easy to use as GitHub, and SVN has never had a site to champion them.
In my case I run my own SVN server, but if I didn't I might end up using GitHub (or ::Workspaces)
|
|
|
|
|
Did you know that Github does SVN too, now? You can have SVN access to the Git repo, it's not like you have to choose Git or SVN!
Er, I can't think of a funny signature right now.
How about a good fart to break the silence?
|
|
|
|
|
Last time I checked, SVN access was read-only.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Git can be confusing and not easy to handle on multiple platforms. But you will try Mercurial only once and fall in love. The TortoiseHg makes your projects so much more transparent and the Gui is the same on all platforms. Even the command line interface is so much easier to learn. Try it out (and choose for yourself, this is my opinion, no need for a war).
|
|
|
|
|
That's why I haven't tried Mercurial. I don't want to fall in love with another tool that isn't widely adopted.
|
|
|
|
|
> I don't want to fall in love with another tool that isn't widely adopted.
I don't think that is a big problem, as it is adopted widely enough (see http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ProjectsUsingMercurial[^]) to stay supported.
And then there are the SVN and Git etc. plugins, so you can first try it out and convert your repositories later ... but stop, I am getting carried away now. If you have a look at it, you may cause even more people to have a look at it and fall in love, so it will be automatically be more widely adopted.
|
|
|
|
|
I used to use SVN but switched to Git with a healthy dose of marketing scepticism but have to say I much, much prefer Git.
Git itself I find overly complex and inconsistent in its argument structure, but in this enlightened, latte drinking world of ours there are plenty of excellent GUIs and Explorer add-ins that make the use painless.
Two specific things I prefer in Git:
1. I can do a series of local commits and then push them all in one hit to the origin (and rebase if I'm feeling clever to ensure a neat history). This saves us from the "never commit broken or not-working code" rule we have internally. You can go a day or two between clean builds in dire times and being able to save a restore point can be a life saver.
2. No centralised repository. We;;, we do have a repo we use as the central repository, but that's merely a nomination. If that server is unavailable we each have a full copy of the repo and can sync up between ourselves perfectly fine. No more server crash terrors.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I've used TFS and SVN in the past, but now that I'm used to Git I am not going back, ever!
It's just better.
|
|
|
|
|
I hated Git when I started using it. But after about a month of using it, I got used to it. Now I can't imagine going back. After using Git, I got to experience TFS for the first time and found it much slower to use.
Hogan
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
