Difference between revisions of "Version Control System"
From Freeside
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
* Smashing magazine [http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/09/18/the-top-7-open-source-version-control-systems/] | * Smashing magazine [http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/09/18/the-top-7-open-source-version-control-systems/] | ||
* Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software] | * Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_revision_control_software] | ||
| + | * DCVS round up [http://ldn.linuxfoundation.org/article/dvcs-round-one-system-rule-them-all-part-1] [http://ldn.linuxfoundation.org/article/dvcs-round-one-system-rule-them-all-part-2] [http://ldn.linuxfoundation.org/article/dvcs-round-one-system-rule-them-all-part-3] | ||
Revision as of 18:48, 23 October 2009
We need to move off of CVS eventually.
Choice #1: Move to subversion, it's CVS 2.0 anyway.
- Subversion (+svk?) - CVS 2.0. Who needs a distributed VCS anyway? (C, svk perl)
Choice #2: Move to a distributed VCS.
- Git - all the cool kids are using it these days (C)
- monotone (C++)
- Mercurial/Hg (python)
- Bazaar - Canoical/Ubuntu/Launchpad (python)
- Darcs (haskell)
Not considering
- Codeville, its dead jim
- Vesta, commercial abandonware, not distributed
Random others
- Aegis - a strange beast. Probably not for us.
References
