Re: What is your preferred VCS?

[Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>]

Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com> writes on comp.lang.ada:
> Well a longer time ago, I just used RCS locally.  But I liked the idea
> of having things backed up on a server, so I moved over to cvs, which
> was in vogue at the time.

CVS is complete and utter rubbish.  Its only redeeming feature was that
it was the only free VCS in existence for many years.

> Then all of a sudden, everyone was developing a new flavour of the
> week VCS. I just stayed with cvs while everyone else went through the
> teething pains of new systems. I'm too busy to be fussing with
> toolchains _and_ my own projects.  I'm also not a big fan of systems
> in perl or python. I suppose each has their place, but I don't think
> the track record is that stellar for reliability.

I switched from CVS to Meta-CVS as soon as I discovered the latter; it
at least solved two of the most gaping problems: keeping track of merges
and renaming files without losing their history.

> But the time has come where I probably need to look at this again.
> Git sounds like a contender.  But it can wait, unless SF takes cvs
> away at some point.
>
> Cvs isn't hard to use. But I have to admit, it wasn't easy when 
> I started for some reason. But once you assimilate into the borg,
> it all seems to be so natural.

I think Monotone is even easier to use than CVS because it has a similar
command set without the idiosyncrasies e.g. per-file history, no proper
merge support, non-atomic commits, expensive branches, expensive tags,
and the list goes on.  Even if you use Monotone only locally, without
taking advantage of its distributed nature, it is still a huge
improvement over CVS.

I personally think mentioning CVS as a contender in 2010 is a blasphemy
:)

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.