Teemu Torma wrote:
On Friday 12 January 2007 23:54, Gregory Dai wrote:
In the recent months, I experienced a transition from using CVS to using SVN with the same project that I've been working on for the past few years in my company. SVN is much faster and much easier to use. I'd suggest that boost make such a transition ASAP.
We are also moving away from CVS (15 years of history), and our opinion is that Mercurial is far better choice. Unfortunately the IDE integration still lacks and Eclipse users are complaining, we are going to first go to SVN in coming weeks, and start using Mercurial in parallel and eventually leave SVN for historic interest only.
I would recommend Mercurial, it is very nice. The distributed nature makes everyone first-class citizen without write access to the central repository.
I, for one, don't want to discuss the issue of what to use again -- I'd like to spend our time on getting the changeover done. For many reasons, we need to get off of CVS -- the faster the better. As part of the shift, we plan to move the hosting off of sourceforge to Indiana Univ. One advantage of using SNV is that their admins are quite familiar with SVN and will be helping to support us. Not to mention that SVN is becoming widespread amoung OSS projects, etc, etc. So there may be products that are better in some way then subversion, but my sense is the clearest and easiest path is to SVN. Jeff