VersionControlSystem
Options for the replacement of CVS
- CVS has a limited authentication model that means we need to fudge permissions every time a file is updated.
- Symlinks are not supported
- CVS is centralised which means that people need to be logged into the cvs pserver in order to use it
- A decentralised repository would reduce the need for branching when commiting medium sized changesets.
- A decentralised repository would mean that people don't have to be logged in to change the code, although they would not then benefit from the public_html facility.
Features Required
- Symlinks
- Good per-module authentication
- Commit-hooks
- File moves
- Faster than cvs
- Easy revert to previous version
Optional Features
- Directory moves
- Web interface
- Read / Write access control
- Decentralised repository
- CVS-link interface
bzr
Bazzar-ng 0.11 will be released with etch
Advantages
- Has native windows support
- Support for directory renames
- Has mode that mimicks cvs
- Fairly extensive documentation
- Lots of plugins
- Uncommit
- Stores executable bit
Disadvantages
- Not quite so fast, but newer versions are better
- Already on version 0.14 - etch already out of date
- Many features are currently only implemented through plugins
git
Git 0.14 will be released with etch
Advantages
- Fast
- Strong support for non-linear development (branching).
- Can use a cvs client for cvs supported operations
Disadvantages
- Renames are guessed based on the contents of a file as opposed to svn & bzr which use unique-ids
- Limited documentation - but improving rapidly (although only for newer versions)
- Rapidly moving target - Currently on 0.15 which is very different from 0.14
- Lots of commands and scripts
svn
Advantages
- Stable
- Very popular replacement for cvs
- Stores executible bit
Disadvantages
- Centralised repository
- Not as many protocal options
