subversion vs cvs [not a troll]

[Marius Gedminas]

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 10:22:37PM -0500, reader at newsguy.com wrote:
> At risk of starting a religious war... I wondered if there is a
> consensus amongst Ubuntu users which versioning software is preferred
> by most ubuntu users... cvs or subversion.

My impression is that nobody uses CVS by choice, except when they're too
used to it and don't want to learn something else.

I personally made the jump to Subversion a few years ago.  I'm happier
with it than I was with CVS.

There are many people who will say you should jump over Subversion and
go directly to the latest and greatest distributed version control
systems, such as Bazaar (sponsored by Canonical), Git (invented for the
use by the Linux kernel developers), or Mercurial.

(My personal impression is still that all these are a bit too new and
not as mature as they will be after a couple of years.)

[snip description about usage]
> So with that level of usage in mind what would people recommend..
> Make the jump to subversion or continue with cvs?

Whatever works for you.  I would suggest trying out Subversion for a new
script/project you're starting, and if (or, rather, when) you like it,
convert existing CVS repositories to it.

Marius Gedminas
-- 
To err is human... to really foul up requires the root password.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20080427/faaa9889/attachment-0001.sig>