[slime-devel] Re: Mercurial

[Helmut Eller]

* Jeronimo Pellegrini [2008-03-04 17:48+0100] writes:

> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 02:48:46PM +0100, Helmut Eller wrote:
>> * Rafaâ Strzaliäski [2008-03-04 13:46+0100] writes:
>> 
>> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Helmut Eller <heller at common-lisp.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>  What do people think of switching from CVS to Mercurial[*] ?
>> >
>> > Why not GIT? SBCL switched from CVS to git with a success. Nikodem S.
>> > wrote very good
>> > tutorial.
>> 
>> The big three VCSes currently seem to be Git, Mercurial and Bazaar.
>
> I certainly don't vote here, but I thought I'd bring one more data
> point.
>
> I have used Monotone in the past, and then switched some of my
> repositories to Git, some to Mercurial. I found Git to be somewhat
> complex as others said. Mercurial was fast and nice *until* I
> had to do non-trivial things like cloning a large repository or
> sending several isolated deltas from the past via email.
>
> I'm going back to Monotone. It may be somewhat slower, but it is *very*
> robust[0], is being actively developed, has very good documentation[1]
> and no complex dependencies. There is also support for visualizing the
> commit graph, among other interesting features.

I never use Monotone.  SLIME is such a small project and I would assume
that we only need the basic features; about the those things that we
used CVS for.  It would be rather disappointing if Mercurial wouldn't
fulfil those moderate needs.

Helmut.