Comparing VCS tools (was ""Development tools and practices for Pythonistas")

rusi rustompmody at gmail.com
Wed Apr 27 04:50:23 CEST 2011


On Apr 27, 6:44 am, Tim Chase <python.l... at tim.thechases.com> wrote:
> On 04/26/2011 01:42 PM, Algis Kabaila wrote:
>
> > Thomas, have you tried bzr (Bazaar) and if so do you consider hg
> > (Mercurial) better?
>
> > And why is it better?   (bzr is widely used in ubuntu, which is
> > my favourite distro at present).
>
> Each of the main 3 (bzr, hg, git) have advantages and
> disadvantages.  As Ben (and others?) mentions, it's best to learn
> one of these instead of starting with something like Subversion
> or worse (CVS or worse, *shudder* MS Visual SourceSafe)

<pros and cons of bzr, git, mercurial snipped>

The distributed revision control page on wikipedia (bottom)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_revision_control
in addition to these, mentions fossil -- something I had not heard of
till now.


Its claims seem to match the OPs lightweight requirements more closely
than any other:

(from above link)
---------------------------
Fossil is cross-platform; its source code compiles on Linux, Mac OS X
and Microsoft Windows. It is not only capable of distributed version
control like Git and Mercurial but also supports distributed bug
tracking, a distributed wiki and a distributed blog mechanism all in a
single integrated package. With its built-in and easy-to-use web
interface, Fossil simplifies project tracking and promotes situational
awareness. A user may simply type "fossil ui" from within any check-
out and Fossil automatically opens the user's web browser in a page
that gives detailed history and status information on that project.
--------------------------
Well so much for the claims :-)

What's the facts? Anyone with any experiences on this?



More information about the Python-list mailing list