Re: GNA is down...

[Nicolas Roard]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 5:30 AM, David Chisnall <theraven@sucs.org> wrote:
> On 13 Feb 2012, at 13:23, Quentin Mathé wrote:
>
>> I quite like Fossil, but I'd be fine with Mercurial too. Both seems to have 
>> a similar command-line interface:
>> Fossil: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/quickstart.wiki
>> Mercurial: 
>> http://ivy.fr/mercurial/ref/v1.0/Mercurial-QuickStart-v1.0-120dpi.png
>>
>> As a disclaimer, my experience is limited to Git. I used it for several 
>> months, although it has some nice features, but its command-line interface 
>> is a pain, and it's easy to corrupt your local repository history by mistake.

I've been using git for the last couple of years at work (well, a mix
of git and our own scripts, gerrit), and while the beginning was a bit
annoying, I really can't work without it now. I agree that you indeed
can shoot yourself in the foot with git, but if you follow a
reasonable workflow it's pretty simple (i.e. git add -p, git commit).
And its merge capabilities are pretty awesome. So if you are looking
at it as a replacement for your SVN workflow, you can keep things very
simple I think; more complicated things are complicated, but at least
they are doable (not really the case with SVN).

Other than the merge capabilities, I think the other important point
with git is that it's now widespread, so it's pretty easy to find
documentation or people to teach you.

That being said, I never played with mercurial, and heard good things
from it as well. Fossil looks interesting, I'm just a bit wary of
picking another obscure technology :)

-- 
Nicolas Roard
"I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound
they make as they fly by." -- Douglas Adams