[ILUG] Distributed versus Centralised SCM.

[Bryan O'Donoghue]

Paul Jakma wrote:

> SVN, with above caveats, is *way* better than CVS. You'll be really 
> happy with using SVN over CVS (if the server side stuff doesnt bother you).
> 
> However, distributed SCM is even better. So I'm holding out hoping for 
> GNU Arch to become user-friendly. If 'svnserve' gains auth and acl 
> features i want before Arch becomes user-friendly, then I might reconsider.


Hmm.

The thing that initially put me off of arch was, the learning curve not 
just for the other developers, but, for myself.

The thing I liked about darcs, was that it has a good page which gave a 
one to one of cvs commands, to darcs commands.
The thing that really put me off darcs, was use of haskell and what kind 
of pit, I'd dig myself into, if I had to, for example make the thing run 
on a win32 client.

Which was when I came to monotone, which apparently has no external 
dependancies, outside of it's src directory.

Ideally, the distributed SCM, which I'll implement unless, there is 
serious opposition to it, comes with a fairly brainless apt-get install 
blah/yum install blah.


However, I know nothing about these three distributed SCMs monotone, 
arch or darcs.

Is GNU arch the obvious choice for some reason or should I bite the 
bullet and test out all three ?

--
Bryan