Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/net/ocamlnet

[gary%duzan.org@localhost]

=>
=> David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost> writes:
=>
=>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 07:50:47AM -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
=>>  > (It seems obvious to me that git is the only reasonable choice
=>>  > these days, but perhaps that's not the common view here.)
=>>
=>> I don't see that. AFAICT the typical reaction to it around here lately
=>> is that its UI is unpardonably awful.
=>
=> I agree with the critcism.  But I've come to the conclusion for work
=> that the best approach overall is to use git and make people learn it
=> (to the point of having multiple all-day classes).  We've used rebasing
=> and history rewriting, and I don't think we could have done taht with
=> other systems.
=>
=> Point taken that there is not consensus or even close.

   Just to throw in my two cents, I've been using Mercurial (hg) on and
off for a few years, with a reasonable amount of success. It is largely
equivalent in functionality to git, the interface seems easier to use,
and while it isn't as popular as git, there are still a number of large
projects using it. I've even managed some success doing incremental
conversions from CVS (though the CVS repo could use a bit of cleanup to
make it seamless).

                                     Gary Duzan