[Click] distributed source control

[Brendan Cully]

(sorry for the broken threading -- I pulled this from the web archive)

I'd like to recommend mercurial (disclaimer: I'm one of the
developers). It's in the same ballpark as git for speed (sometimes
slower, sometimes faster), but the UI is much friendlier. In fact I've
been maintaining a mercurial mirror of the click repository for some
time:

http://hg.kublai.com/click/release/one/
http://hg.kublai.com/click/packages/

> Git can be irritating, in that the central repository
> must pull copies from the downstream versions, at
> least  to the best of my knowledge. The last time I
> tried git, the push command didn't do a whole lot. It
> also doesn't integrate cleanly into bugtrackers like
> trac or project management systems such as gforge or
> collaboa.

Mercurial integrates quite well with trac. I've set this up for mutt
(the mail program, which I maintain) so that commit messages can
automatically close referenced bugs etc (dev.mutt.org/trac/).

> Having said that, git is the only distributed source
> control system in general use. There are plenty of
> such systems, but you don't see them being used with
> nearly the same frequency as git. Some, such as arch,
> are also beginning to look like abandonware, which is
> exactly what you don't want.

Mercurial is used by a fair number of high profile projects, including
xen, mozilla, and opensolaris (and mutt :)). There's a nice subset
listed here:

http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ProjectsUsingMercurial

--- Eddie Kohler <kohler at cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I would like to move away from Click's current
> anonymous CVS based 
> development model to a distributed source control
> system.  This would 
> let people maintain public branches of their own.  I
> am leaning towards 
> "git", the tool originally developed for Linux.
> 
> http://git.or.cz/
> 
> Any complaints or comments?  Speak now!
> 
> Thanks,
> Eddie