[implementations-list] Re: Which version control system should we use: darcs / git / svn / hg / other (was: Vimpulse update)

Mon Jun 22 17:25:48 CEST 2009

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Jason Spiro <jasonspiro3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think it'd be best to use something that:
>
> 1.  we can find free online hosting for.
>
> 2.  works with Assembla, since Vimpulse's bug tracking is on Assembla already.
>        So this means svn, git, or Mercurial.  Darcs is not supported.
>
> 3.  a lot of people already know the basics of how to use.
>
> 4.  is easy to learn, so that if new maintainers or co-maintainers
> step up, they can continue easily.
>        Based on what I have read, svn and Mercurial are easy to learn, but
> Git is harder.
>
> But I am not a maintainer.  So it is 100% your choice what to use.
>
> What do you think you will use?
>
> P.S.  I already know how to use svn and git, but I learned them a long
> time ago and don't remember how hard they are to learn.

I sent the above message before I saw that you created a SourceForge
project.  I see you picked svn.  I think you made a good choice.

But now there are two bug trackers:  one on Assembla and one on
Sourceforge.  I recommend Trac over the Sourceforge one; it's easier
to use and more powerful.  Do Sourceforge's admin tools let you close
down all of the Sourceforge tracker's sections (Patches, Feature
Requests, etc.)?

And there are three discussion venues:  implementations-list, plus the
Help and Open Discussion forum sections at Sourceforge.  Do
Sourceforge's admin tools let you close down all of the Sourceforge
forum system's sections?

(If you make me [jasonspiro] a Sourceforge project admin, and ask me
to close down those Sourceforge sections, I will do it for you.)

Best idea of all:  Why not close down Sourceforge and use Assembla for
both svn and Trac?  And maybe for wiki hosting too.  Using one service
for hosting everything would be much less confusing for users than
using Sourceforge for some services and Assembla for others.