[Techtalk] Version Control Systems

[Kathryn Andersen]

With all this talk about version control, I've been wondering myself if
I should change over from CVS.  Problem is, the number of choices is
bewildering, and all the discussions I've been able to find on the net
seem to be talking about things I'm not interested in.  I don't care
whether it's using a centralized or a distributed model, because the
things I'm thinking of changing from CVS are personal things like my
website, and perl scripts for which I'm the only developer.  (The stuff
that's on sourceforge under their CVS would be too much hassle to move,
and I'd have nowhere to move it to, not that wasn't using CVS anyway --
no point).

So the kind of things I'm interested in are versioning and snapshots and
rollback and ease of setup and ease of use (and being better than CVS,
including the Big Renaming Problem).

For me, subversion looks like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut -- it
doesn't seem to be worth the hassle of its setup, not for what one gets
out of it.

Aegis struck me as being too big and complicated too.

That seems to leave arch/tla, darcs or monotone.  I'm leaning a bit
towards darcs at the moment, as it seems to be simpler in its commands
and setup.  But is there anyone here who has used any of these, who
could say what they're like to use?

Kathryn Andersen
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and
 the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money it values more, it will
 lose that, too."
-- W. Somerset Maugham
-- 
 _--_|\     | Kathryn Andersen	<http://www.katspace.com>
/      \    | 
\_.--.*/    | GenFicCrit mailing list <http://www.katspace.com/gen_fic_crit/>
      v     | 
------------| Melbourne -> Victoria -> Australia -> Southern Hemisphere
Maranatha!  |	-> Earth -> Sol -> Milky Way Galaxy -> Universe