Chris Wellons wrote:

I’m going to be one of those people and tell you this: Git is The Shit!

True, GIT=SHIT…

Better use Mercurial/Bazaar.

@ Sam Weston:

Nice. Thanks for the link. For a second there I thought they were using Google’s SVN for this project, which would be quite ironic. The Source page points to an external git instance so I guess it’s ok.

@ Chris Wellons:

I know, I know it’s shameful. The point about TortoiseSVN is that it integrates itself into the window manager. Each file that is under source control will have a special marker on it’s icon – green if it is the same as in the repository, red if it was changed and etc. It lets you see at a glance which files were changed, which need to be checked in and etc. If you want to commit some files but not others you highlight them with your mouse, right click and say commit. For simple operations it is incredibly intuitive. I do use command line usually when I’m coding on Linux but whenever I’m messing around on a windows machine it is so easy to fall back on the old Tortoise habit. :P

@ peterix:

Yeah, I tried mess around with branches in SVN at several occasions and it usually worked ok for a little while and then turned into a massive headache once I needed to merge everything back together.

Been using CVS, VSS, Perforce, SVN, VSS for now. Not all have been by choice. VSS listed twice because of awfulness. Will try Gitt or Mecurial once I get out of “STRESS” time and get a new personal project started.

Most important feature; it helps you do what you want. Subversion is (for now) good enough, and no trouble. :)

i use clearcase at work, but for everything else i use fossil. i haven’t tried git yet, so i can’t compare it to fossil or clearcase. for what its worth, fossil impresses.

I still am using Subversion for some Rails systems we wrote, but lately, been exploring Git though not real comfortable with it even though I’ve read through the O’Reilly book. Seems to do all svn does, though initially, had problems building it on OS X…

I mostly use Subversion.

We did try Mercurial a few years ago but after corrupting the repository 4 times and having multiple branching/merging problems, we gave up on it and went back to svn, and didn’t have any further problems… whatever bug we were having should be fixed by now, I hope.

I voted for Darcs mostly because it was fun to add a poll option :D. But it being based on a “theory of patches” is pretty cool.

I answered Git, but if I could have answered twice, I’d have voted for Mercurial as well.

Both are very powerful, Git has more features and Mercurial is easier to start with.

Anyway, I prefer both of them over CVS, SVN or Perforce (by far) — I’ve never tested the others.

I have added Telelogic Synergy, but I hate it. I had to use it for years in a project for a customer. It has a nice concept of “tasks” to bundle some files together which are logically related, and then you check in the task, and not each singular file. This is nice. But CLI and GUI are the worst I’ve ever seen.

Currently I use Subversion with the GForge web GUI. This is kind of a commercial sourceforge clone. I like it. As you, I’m using Tortoise most of the time, but it’s nice that you can mix svn CLI and Tortoise GUI. For batch jobs I return to bash+svn+gforge on the CLI.

I’ve made the jump from svn to git quite recently and I can’t complain. It’s just so nice :)

And yes, merges are where it’s at really. I make a few working branches during the day, test the hell out of my code and then merge those back to master. In svn, this kind of workflow would be really tedious… if not impossible.

There’s also the possibility of using git to work with a svn repo.

Oh, btw: http://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/