Re: What is your preferred VCS?

[deadlyhead <deadlyhead@gmail.com>]

Thanks for all the replies!  I'm glad nobody took this as an
invitation to a flame war.  ;-)

From this small-but-elite sample, it seems like Monotone and Git are
the routes to check out more deeply, if for no other reasons than
speed and code security.  Developers seem to trust them!

Y'know, I've never actually gotten Bazaar to work on any system I've
been running, whether from packages or source, GNU/Linux or Windows.
Something in a library always seems to go wrong, and I'm just not
interested enough to dig deeper.  (I'm not particularly a fan of
Python, which is why I haven't looked at Mercurial closely, either.)

For those who like Monotone: is using a "real database" really that
much of advantage?  I'm a bit leery of such an opaque system being
used to save my patches.  Having physical file-system access to
changes makes _me_ feel a bit more secure, and is something that I
really like about GNU Arch.  Is it the speed that makes it good?  Or
collision detection? I'm just curious; I've never had problems in
those areas before, so I'm a bit insensitive.

And those who like Git:  Fast, cheap and easy... for some reason that
seems _very_ Linus Torvalds-ish.  :-)  Still, Perl scripts
intermingled with C?  Perhaps I just need to get over that.  I'll read
over the Why Git is Better... site.  It _does_ seem easy to try out.
Perhaps I'll be able to look the other way when it comes to
aesthetics.

Sorry, Warren. CVS/SVN are right out.  Their tools that I use to
download source code from Sourceforge, but I just don't think I could
handle actually _working_ with them.  I've had better luck just
archiving the *~ files saved by Emacs than I have with using SVN
locally.