VCS software (Status of xserver/debrix/modular tree?)

[Bernardo Innocenti]

Daniel Stone wrote:

>>(this is not svn propaganda, I don't use svn myself and don't
>>have an opinion on arch VS. svn or similar issues).
> 
> Personally, I'm not convinced by SVN, since its model doesn't solve
> a lot of the fundamental problems we have with CVS, IMO.  I think
> the system with the most compelling foundations and the most promise
> is Arch, which is a great system with a rather horrid UI as it stands
> (albeit, one that's rapidly improving).

I've got curious about arch some time ago, but the total
lack of documentation and its total departure from existing
systems scared me off.

I had also evaluated SVN for internal use, and found it too
slow and unreliable, with too few features over CVS to be
worth switching (it was SVN 0.9, I believe).


> As much as CVS sucks and is an utter pile of crap, I don't think any
> of the replacements are yet compelling enough to look at; especially
> ones which do not solve its fundamental problems.  If we move now, I
> can guarantee you that we'll still be on that system in five years,
> so it had better be a damn good one -- never underestimate the inertia
> once you have moved to a new system.

This is also what some GCC developers are complaining about:
once you've switched to something that's not as bad as CVS
and got used to it, switching to a better solution would be
impossible.


> I think that in a year, we'll be able to sit down and have a more
> realistic discussion about systems such as Bazaar (XDC 2006?), but
> right now, none of the alternatives to CVS bear considering IMO.
>
> Realistically, the only choice for us is to continue hobbling along
> with CVS, and just deal with the fact that it sucks.

The GCC people discussed switching away from CVS at the GCC Summit in
2004, and they too concluded that there were too many open alternatives
with no clear winner.  They decided to postpone the decision a year to
see what would happen.  Now it seems they're very close to switching.


> Bias disclosure: I work for Canonical, who produce Bazaar, which is
> a friendly fork of tla to improve the UI.  But I don't work on Bazaar
> itself.

I've found baz much easier to install and use than tla, but I still
miss *lots* of user-level documentation... expecially when it's so
different from any other VCS I've ever seen.

-- 
  // Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
\X/  http://www.develer.com/