Reply to: Git, Subversion, CVS

[paddytheirishman]

ClearCase is good, but complicated and expensive. Perforce is good and would be what I would recommend to a client.

[Moscow Mule]

Client co Java bods use SVN (plugged into RAD which I understand is quite handy).

They don't bother with source control on the iseries yet.

[xchaotic]

Not allowed to use SVN at current client co (I suggested it for current project) as it's open source and policy prohibits the use of such apps.

Saying that though, happy with StarTeam and just glad it didn't go on VSS!

You should quit, it's not all about the money you know...

[administrator]

Another reason for us using svn is we can get Windows-using designers to check in using tortoise and not having to touch a shell window.

[jim2406]

SVN would get my vote.

you'd be really surprised how many places are both using VSS, and don't believe there's anything better..

[RasputinDude]

Another SVN here.

CVS is good but as others have said is file based and doesn't store directory changes.

[administrator]

Another svn vote here. Been using it for a good few years now and could not do without it. Interest in GIT after seeing Linus Torvalds video about it but as subversion does what I want then I have no desire to put myself through a needless learning curve.

[d000hg]

SVN is solid and industry standard, basically CVS but much better. It's also still undergoing continual improvement from a lot of active developers.

GIT is quite popular amongst geeks but I don't have any experience with it.

For paid software, VSS is a bad choice. Perforce is pretty widely used, and I read an article discussing how MS used a custom version of it for development of a recent version of Windows (maybe they since switched to SVN, if so that's relatively recent).

MS has never said VSS is for big software projects, as far as I know. These days, they promote use of Team Suite, which I've actually heard good things about... and would suit big corporations with site licenses of Visual Studio.

[VectraMan]

SVN. Microsoft use it - which is a great advert for source-safe.

SourceSafe is ancient. They haven't updated it since version 6, which I think was 1998.

[OrangeHopper]

Recently recommended SVN when client wanted alternative to PVCS and CVS.

I like the fact it effectively takes a copy of the repository on each check-in which means it records changes in directory content.

[thunderlizard]

I voted for svn. But I'm using perforce at the moment and that's OK too.

[Durbs]

SVN. Microsoft use it - which is a great advert for source-safe.

Not allowed to use SVN at current client co (I suggested it for current project) as it's open source and policy prohibits the use of such apps.

Saying that though, happy with StarTeam and just glad it didn't go on VSS!

[lightng]

SVN. Microsoft use it - which is a great advert for source-safe.

[Durbs]

SVN very good and has lots of support and associated tools (most of which are free, which is nice). Have used VisualSVN and found it really simple to setup and use.

Currently using StarTeam (http://www.borland.com/us/products/starteam/index.html) and am still getting my head around it. Initial thoughts are that its good though and had no problems so far.

[VectraMan]

Yes SVN is pretty good, free, and has good GUI tools like Tortoise SVN to make it easy to use. IIRC from a previous client, CVS is all file based, so if you say commit 10 files as part of one change you get 10 commits with different version numbers for each, which then makes tracking changes as a whole much more difficult. And I think what Ministrone says about renaming or moving files is right too. SVN is really CVS done properly, so there's no reason to go with CVS.

GIT sounded quite interesting, but seems to be based around large distributed teams which might not be quite so good for a smaller team. It seemed to me that the actual day to day working would be more difficult, and would require much more management. But I don't speak with any experience of using it.