[rspec-users] OT local version control?

Chad Humphries chad at theedgecase.com
Sun Jan 27 17:42:19 EST 2008


A good thing to note is that you can run many of the distributed scm tools
in a 'svn wrapper' mode to ease transition with existing repositories.  That
made the switch much easier for me.
- Chad

On Jan 27, 2008 5:00 PM, Dan North <tastapod at gmail.com> wrote:

> I can see this descending into a mercurial vs git religious war :)
>
> Hi Corey. I'm using mercurial for both home and work use (supplementing
> some of subversion's shortcomings, mainly around merging). I looked
> (briefly) at git and - less briefly - at darcs. I settled on mercurial for
> purely non-scientific reasons. People whose opinions I respect are using it,
> the community seems both accommodating and active, and it's python which
> means it runs anywhere python lives, which is all of my home and work
> environments.
>
> Others on this list - including the lovely David - are using git and
> having just as much fun and productivity, so I'm sure it comes down to a
> matter of taste in the end.
>
> The big shift, though, is from centralised to distributed source control.
> This means that any working copy is also a full repository in its own right,
> so you can do everything you would usually need the server for: branching,
> tagging, cloning, logging, checking in, rolling back, etc. This page (
> http://tinyurl.com/ykcs25) from the Mercurial wiki gives a pretty good
> overview. The basic model will be the same for any of the distributed SCMs.
>
> My experience so far is:
>
> git: insanely fast, made up of many shell scripts, big command set, does
> /BIG/ repositories (currently used for the entire linux kernel), doesn't run
> on windows.
> darcs: also fast, written in haskell so less "hackable". Has best
> cherry-picking support (choosing out-of-sequence changesets). Apparently
> doesn't do so well under biiig repositories.
> mercurial: also fast (seeing a pattern here?). Seems to scale well. Has
> (deliberately) svn/cvs-like command set where it can, so easy to adopt. This
> is where I've ended up.
> monotone: the first distributed scm I came across (Dave Astels was using
> it before any of the rest of us had heard of distributed scm). Never really
> used it much.
>
> At the end of the day it will be a personal preference. But whichever you
> end up with, my prediction is that you'll enjoy it much more than
> subversion.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
>
>
> On 27/01/2008, Corey Haines <coreyhaines at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi, all,
> >
> > This isn't about rspec, but this list has people whose opinions I
> > respect.
> >
> > So, I'm looking for a new version control system for my local
> > development. I was going to install subversion, but I've heard rumors of
> > people using some newer ones. Thoughts? I'd like to be able to run it either
> > locally or on a home server. If I run it off a home server, then it needs to
> > support offline access, so that I can use a cached version when I'm not on
> > my home network. For simplicity's sake, running it locally is probably a
> > better solution.
> >
> > What do you all use?
> >
> >
> > -Corey
> >
> > --
> > http://www.coreyhaines.com
> > The Internet's Premiere source of information about Corey Haines
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20080127/68c8bf07/attachment.html 


More information about the rspec-users mailing list