Poll: Which version control system should we use?
It's time for our teeny team to start using something to manage versions and we need to decide which. Help?
- 14 points
SVN
- 17 points
Git
- 2 points
Other (list below and I'll add)
- 1 point
None - who needs it!?
- 9 points
Mercurial
Comments
I use both git and svn. Git for open source projects and projects I personally control. Subversion for a number of projects that are linked to things like trac and other encompassing systems that the teams do not wish to change.
I can advocate for Git on a number of levels. Certainly there is reason to evangelize the distributed architecture, but it also has merits for a many other reasons like amazing speed, features, and the like. I am sure that I haven't even scratched the surface yet, but I constantly find git features that make me never want to return to svn. All that said, I have no experience with mercurial or bazaar, both of which are of similar designs to git.
Currently SVN. Previously CVS, ClearCase, and RCS. (Over the past 4 years, in reverse order.)
I was trying to encourage the use of SVN and the first place, but did not have the clout and systems access to change it. Between the 4, SVN is a clear winner, although Eclipse still has slightly better CVS support.
You probably want to rephrase this as what version control system do you use that we should use.
As my other post shows, it's quite possible that people responding will be skewing the data because they only know of these products ... and they might not be recommending it as opposed to being stuck with it.
Great point. Fixed (but hopefully doesn't change the results too much). I easily forget that many are forced to use tools they'd prefer not to.
It's time to start using something _now_? The time to start using source/version control is before you start. It doesn't matter which, just pick one. Other than getting used to the command interface, it should be pretty easy to migrate to a different one, either by doing a total conversion porting all the history over, or if that's not possible (which it may not be if you go with a distributed system and you want to move to a centralized setup) then just keeping the old one around as reference and just start doing all new work in the new one.
I used subversion until about 2 weeks ago when I started work at a new company and now use Git. Git is much more powerful, in my opinion - branching is incredibly easy to work on experimental code.
Branching is pretty easy in Subversion as long as you're using 1.5.x.
Yeah, it's really merging that's a pain in Subversion. Easy merging has been the biggest win for me with Git.
Mercurial
I use SVN at work, but for my own projects I use Mercurial because I was already familiar with TortiseSVN, and I was able to start using Mercurial right away with TortiseHG.