Re: What is your preferred VCS?

[Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>]

Ludovic Brenta expounded in news:87k4odxcuz.fsf@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.

> 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, 

I've _never_ found that to be limiting.

> no proper merge support, 

Do you mean between different branches? Then yes, this might
be a problem.  I tend not to do branches, so my life is 
simpler (though we did do this at work some time before
we were forced to use an inferior commercial product).

But it merges just fine between the file and a newer
committed change.

> non-atomic commits, 

That's never been an issue, even when my team (at work)
was active with it. It was a small team mind you.

>  expensive branches, 

We didn't use this that much. I tend not to for Open S.
projects (I have that luxury ;-)

> expensive tags,

"Expensive" is a relative term, but who cares? You don't
do this very often.

> 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.

Personally, the issues you cited were never a big deal
for me.  

I suppose if you had 100s of programmers pounding
on the same cvs server, or you had several millions of
files involved, I could see scaling problems.  But none
of that ever applied to me.

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

Hah! 8-<

Warren