Which versioning system is the simplest to use??

[cpghost]

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:59:13 -0500
David Kelly <dkelly at hiwaay.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 11, 2007 at 03:41:14PM -0300, Agus wrote:
> > Hi List,
> > 
> > I am doing a little bit of security and log watching with sec.pl and
> > was trying to mantain de secconf files organized...  So whenever one
> > is changed it keeps track of the change and can rollback....
> > 
> > O that is what i am going to use de versioning sytem for...
> > 
> > I will appreciate your tips very much....
> 
> CVS is already in FreeBSD. It works very well but is widely accepted
> that a redesign could do better. Subversion's stated goal is to be a
> better CVS than CVS. The commands are very much the same but most else
> is different underneath.
> 
> A negative to Subversion is that it tries to be everything for
> everyone. Doesn't appear to be a subversion-lite version available.
> 
> At the moment I continue to use CVS for older stuff that was started
> under CVS, and SVN for new stuff.

Using CVS here since it evolved from RCS. It has its annoying
quirks here and there, but it has been rock solid despite heavy use.
I understand that SVN could be a drop-in replacement for CVS and
that there are tools to migrate even complex CVS repositories.
But CVS ain't broken, so there's no need to switch yet... POLA
being more important to us on old data than newish-ness. ;)

But if you're just starting, Subversion is just as good: go for it!
It is actively maintained and for simple non-branching uses it is
dead easy to get used to.

Regards,
-cpghost.

-- 
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/