Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Ongoing Comparison Between Version Control Systems

[Damien Elmes]

Shlomi Fish <address@hidden> writes:

> I started composing a comparison between several prominent and accessible
> version control systems on a feature-by-feature basis. The comparison can
> be found here:
>
> http://better-scm.berlios.de/comparison/comparison.html
>
> The original XML and perl script that renders it, can be found here:
>
> http://better-scm.berlios.de/comparison/
>
> I am contacting you to make sure Arch is properly represented there. Note
> that there were some things I did not there, and possibly some
> incorrections.

- aegis supports atomic commits

- aegis's rename support is a bit esoteric (and of the 4 that support
  them - are there any differences? the wording makes that unclear. it
  might confuse people a bit to vary the wording on tools that have
  the same behavior - ie, what's "fully supported" in comparison?)

- how about for arch's repository permissions - "access permissions on
  an arch repository are global, but arch makes it easy to mirror
  projects in different locations - so it is possible to emulate
  access to a subset of the project list pretty easily"

- ability to work on only one directory: both aegis and arch don't
  support this, I believe. Also note that arch uses the term
  repository to refer to a set of projects, which makes the wording a
  bit confusing.

- on docs - I'd say the documentation was good, but in parts out of
  date and incomplete. While I agree that the layout of the Aegis
  docs was bad, the content was quite good - I think you're a bit
  unfair there.

- arch's command set - defined differently to what?

- aegis's command set - perhaps a reminder that it's more than a VC
  tool, and also provides scm facilities like change control
  procedures. the complexity is frustrating if you just want vc, but
  it offers more than that.

Cheers,
-- 
Damien Elmes