From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2006-01-04T11:30:48+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby projects and interfaces to revision control systems

IIRC the Xen project (virtualizer) uses Mercurial, so they would be a 
good reference.

The workflow comment is a valid one. My guess is that there aren't a 
whole lot of people who use SVN and CVS without some kind of software 
project management wrapper any more. One such system that seems popular 
is Trac.

Ollivier Robert wrote:

>Alan Garrison wrote:
>  
>
>>I'd lean towards Darcs for overall use, and I'm sure each of the above
>>is a perfectly legitimate solution for various individuals.  I'm simply
>>curious as to other Rubyist's preferences towards the last 2 on the 
>>list.
>>    
>>
>
>Please don't limit yourself to just Darcs and SVN/CVS.  Consider your 
>usage and first choose between a centralised VCS (SVN/CVS) and a 
>distributed one (Mercurial, Darcs, svk).  This first choice will shape 
>your workflow.
>
>If you choose a distributed one, I'd like to turn you towards 
>Mercurial[1]. It is written in something easier to play with (Python), 
>very fast and does not share some of Darcs limitations (like having the 
>whole tree in memory at commit time).
>
>It has its own of course but I find it very powerful and can handle big 
>trees such as FreeBSD's /usr/ports and the Linux kernel.
>
>Cheers,
>-----
>[1] http://selenic.com/mercurial/
>
>  
>

-- 
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

http://linuxcapacityplanning.com