Revision control advice

[Rob Byrnes]

On 22 December 2011 15:07, Outback Dingo <outbackdingo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:24 PM, ss griffon <ssgriffonuser at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Da Rock
>> <freebsd-questions at herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:
>>> On 12/22/11 11:37, Chris Hill wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello list,
>>>>
>>>> I apologize for this posting being not-much-on-topic, but my other
>>>> resources have come to naught and I think you folks may have some experience
>>>> in this area.
>>>>
>>>> I'm looking to set up some sort of revision control system at work. Simple
>>>> enough, except that our situation is approximately the reverse of what most
>>>> revision control systems are designed for.
>>>>
>>>> Unlike, e.g., FreeBSD kernel development, we have dozens or hundreds of
>>>> small, rapid-fire projects that are created at the rate of 3 to 20 per
>>>> month. They last a few days or a few months and are (usually) not developed
>>>> afterward. Each project has one to three developers working on it, sometimes
>>>> simultaneously. Usually it's one guy per project.
>>>>
>>>> Since my programmers are not necessarily UNIX-savvy, I'd like to deploy a
>>>> web interface for them which will allow them to create new repositories
>>>> (projects) as well as the normal checkin, checkout, etc. I want to set this
>>>> up once, and from there on have the programmers deal with managing their own
>>>> repos. And heaven forfend exposing them to the horrors of the shell.
>>>>
>>>> I've built a test server (9.0-RC3, amd64) for experimenting with this
>>>> stuff. So far I've installed and played with:
>>>>  - fossil. I like the simplicity and light weight, but it doesn't seem to
>>>> allow creation of new repos at all (let alone multiple ones) from the web
>>>> interface, and the documentation is meager. I've pretty much given up on it.
>>>>  - subversion, which looks like the heavy hitter of RCSs, but it's not at
>>>> all clear to me how to handle the multiple-project scenario. Still working
>>>> on it.
>>>>  - git looks promising, but I have not installed it yet.
>>>>
>>>> If anyone can point me to a tool that might be suitable, I would be most
>>>> grateful.
>>>
>>> I'd suggest subversion. It allows individual files to be versioned, you can
>>> setup a webdav interface, and there are other tools that can help maintain
>>> it.
>>>
>>> Forget the individual repositories. Setup a single repository and have
>>> directories for each project. in each directory you can then setup trunk,
>>> branches, whatever, as per best practices in the Book.
>>>
>>> Designate a person or two to administer, and use directory level auth, or
>>> another alternative I haven't thought of.
>>>
>>> My 2c's anyway. HTH
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
>>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>>
>> Yeah I would second what Mr Rock says.  Set up a single repo where
>> folders can be used for projects.  Since svn lets you checkout sub
>> folders of a repo, each developer can check out the folder that
>> corresponds to their project.  Also, Tortoise svn is a very nice
>> graphical utility that will allow your developers to manage there svn
>> folders without even needing a web interface (most non unix people
>> that I know like tortoise), so there is less maintenance for you :)
>> Finally, kudos to moving towards using version control, its an
>> important step for a software company.
>
> git or mercurial - best choices


For what reasons?

Rob



-- 
Idiot :
    A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human
affairs has always been dominant and controlling.
(Ambrose Bierce - The Devils Dictionary)