[nycbug-talk] a new direction for NYC*BUG

Siobhan Lynch trish at bsdunix.net
Thu Mar 25 11:05:08 EDT 2010

John Baldwin wrote:
> On Thursday 25 March 2010 3:20:19 am Andy Kosela wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Francisco Reyes <lists at stringsutils.com> wrote:
>>> For all the fervor/fanaticism other tools get I find CVS still gets the job
>>> done for small in-house projects.
>> I second that.  Even for medium sized projects CVS still rocks.  Look
>> how many years FreeBSD project survived with that.
> FreeBSD was helped by the fact that we also have a p4 depot setup to do side
> branches in (I do all my non-trivial feature branches in p4).  I still use
> CVS for small things myself.  If you want to offer a centralized SCM host I
> would offer svn though (even if it is a bit of a pig performance-wise) as
> changesets are too useful to pass up compared to CVS for new projects IMO.
> I can't offer any useful opinion on git vs hg.

I used Mercurial (hg) for some development a while ago, when I worked
with lots of stuff in OpenSolaris (Josh Rivel was around when I was
doing some OpenSol stuff with Crossbow)... and I still chose to use CVS
for local work on our own projects.

I am somewhat old fashioned... seems like I've been around since the
dinosaurs - at least the FreeBSD dinosaurs (FreeBSD 2.1.x being the
first versions I used, prior to that yes, I was a linux weenie) and
change is difficult for me, but if someone was to rule out CVS for
myself, out of what has been mentioned, git, svn, p4, and hg, I would
most likely choose hg.

But thats a personal preference... not based on features, based on my
inability to change - though svn can be more or less "dropped in" to
replace CVS from a user's perspective (but not the repository - though
conversion tools exist) - I just liked hg - and enjoyed it - and if I
had to change, I would most likely choose hg - because its similar
enough to be comfortable, but featureful enough to mean something in


More information about the talk mailing list