What source control are you using?

Trojan · 27-05-2013 3:59pm #1

Source control, aka version control, aka revision control, aka source configuration management. If you're not familiar, look it up.

I use a very simple Mercurial setup - TortoiseHG versioning stuff locally, plus a free Bitbucket account for backup that I push to every so often. A lot of folks out there swear by Git these days, others by Subversion. A friend recently recommended me Bazaar which I'm going to check out eventually.

What do you use? Nothing? SCCS? Git?

Sparks · 27-05-2013 4:12pm

At work? Clearcase. Not Clearcase UCM, just Clearcase. Weep for me.

Outside of work, I use mercurial for my stuff and sometimes git or svn for when I'm fiddling with open source stuff (where the maintainer gets to chose the version control setup).

jester77 · 27-05-2013 4:16pm

Have been using git for the last 6 years with github enterprise at work and github/bitbucket for personal stuff. Was using SVN, MKS and CVS before that, git is definitely so much better because of its distributed architecture.

aperture_nuig · 27-05-2013 4:58pm

Sparks wrote: »

At work? Clearcase. Not Clearcase UCM, just Clearcase. Weep for me.

Outside of work, I use mercurial for my stuff and sometimes git or svn for when I'm fiddling with open source stuff (where the maintainer gets to chose the version control setup).

Another Clearcase sufferer here, glad to see I'm not alone

Again, I use git with bitbucket with my own stuff.

COYW · 27-05-2013 5:07pm

Used Sourcesafe, TFS and Git. TFS seems to be the most liked from my experience. Some of the companies I have dealt with recently still use Sourcesafe, disturbingly, and two of these were well know companies, not small operations.

Git with bitbucket at home too.

ChRoMe · 27-05-2013 5:14pm

SVN.

KonFusion · 27-05-2013 6:00pm

Git at work, git at home. (especially since they gave me all those free repos, those glorious gits!)

OfflerCrocGod · 27-05-2013 6:03pm

Perforce at work, git ofc for GitHub

.

Perforce is nice enough but I'd be happy for my work to move over to git.

Dave! · 27-05-2013 6:34pm

Git at home and in work.

I've never used another VCS, so can't compare, but version control in general has been such a revelation since I started using it only a few months ago! Feckin life changing

I use Bitbucket for my personal stuff (cos the private repos are free!), and GH in work.

shanefitz360 · 27-05-2013 7:03pm

Dropbox

Creamy Goodness · 27-05-2013 7:21pm

Git.

awec · 27-05-2013 7:34pm

ChRoMe wrote: »

SVN.

People still use that? :eek:

Colonel Panic · 27-05-2013 7:56pm

Someone posted "Dropbox" and you respond to someone using SVN?

:D

Ludo · 27-05-2013 8:39pm

Currently CVS at work.

May be switching to GIT soon(which probably means another year of CVS at least). Have messed about with GitHub for my own personal stuff so hard to tell how it works in a large team as never experienced it.

Previously Clearcase, Perforce (my favourite so far), VSS, MKS, SVN and various others.

RealistSpy · 27-05-2013 8:46pm

Started with subversion and I am now moving to Git

Sparks · 27-05-2013 9:00pm

awec wrote: »

People still use that? :eek:

A lot of open source projects do. It's probably [sticks neck out] the best of the non-distributed version control systems out there.

ChRoMe · 28-05-2013 1:02am

awec wrote: »

People still use that? :eek:

People still use CVS!

There is nothing wrong with SVN, it serves our needs well tbh.

Colonel Panic · 28-05-2013 8:37am

Svn is fine. I used to panic a bit when it came to merging lots of commits though.

matrim · 28-05-2013 9:00am

We use svn for most of our server side work, but do have some newer mobile client development on git. There have been some initial discussions about re-evaluating our server side source control choice with a mention of moving to git but it will probably be another while before we do it.

At home I use git. I do have a couple of older projects that use svn but haven't touched them in about 2 years so haven't bothered to move them

jester77 · 28-05-2013 9:39am

For anyone that uses both git and svn, you are probably aware of this, but if not, you can use the git svn bridge. I don't have many SVN repos these days but it's handy to use as I tend to forget the SVN equivalent of git commands.

rainbow kirby · 28-05-2013 10:11am

SVN at work, Git/Bitbucket at home.

kayos · 28-05-2013 11:20am

Currently TFS, previously SVN, VSS and Continuous.

Trojan · 28-05-2013 1:12pm

I used to use TRUEchange, back in 1999, when I moved on to sccs

Boskowski · 28-05-2013 1:13pm

Subversion. What's supposed to be wrong with that anyway?

Sparks · 28-05-2013 1:33pm

Boskowski wrote: »

Subversion. What's supposed to be wrong with that anyway?

It's not shiny enough

Honestly, there's nothing wrong with subversion for most tasks; but for some, the distributed version control model is probably better to work with, and for a very few projects that see lots of commits and merges, git is pretty much built for that.

croo · 28-05-2013 4:01pm

re: what's wrong with subversion...
If you share the repos with a remote group of developer one point is you must be online to get the repos history whereas with git or mercurial (or bazaar) you've got the whole repos history locally. Of course the other side of that coin is that if the repos is large it seem to take an age to download the whole repos with all it's branches and history.

On an open source ERP app that I work with we were using SVN and switched to Mercurial and the repos size has been a bit of a issue because with mercurial it's an all or nothing affair... there have been some suggestions to shift to git because it allows you clone a single branch instead of the entire repository.

When you live in a place with no or bad broadband (like a lot of Ireland) that can be an issue!

Sparks · 28-05-2013 4:09pm

It can also be handy if you work on several machines - for example, I'm mucking about with an open source program at the moment and it uses svn which means I can't co to my laptop and then clone that copy of the repository to my office or home desktops; with mercurial or git I could, and that would let me poke about at the problem on any of those machines, forward the changes to the others, generally kick my idea into shape and test it, and then send the patch back on up to the maintainer.

I mean, I can do something similar, but it's a lot more work and means firing patch files between the machines I'm using.

(but how many people work on the same problem on several different machines like that?)

GreeBo · 28-05-2013 4:10pm

Mercurial here in work, though some projects are also using SVN and.....Serena

croo · 28-05-2013 4:28pm

Sparks wrote: »

(but how many people work on the same problem on several different machines like that?)

I do!

TrueDub · 28-05-2013 4:45pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Mercurial here in work, though some projects are also using SVN and.....Serena

I feel your pain!

Using Mercurial in work, having used SVN, Clearcase and a few others in the past. Home is SVN, although I think a shift to git is in the offing.

ChRoMe · 28-05-2013 4:48pm

Sparks wrote: »

It's not shiny enough

Honestly, there's nothing wrong with subversion for most tasks; but for some, the distributed version control model is probably better to work with, and for a very few projects that see lots of commits and merges, git is pretty much built for that.

The big problems with distributed version control, really kick in when you are working on very sensitive code. I've worked in two environments where the possibility of someone having a local copy of the whole repo was not acceptable.

What source control are you using?

Comments