mercurial or svn for the source ?

Coordinator
Feb 25, 2011 at 12:50 AM
Edited Feb 25, 2011 at 1:03 AM

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/codeplex/archive/2010/01/22/codeplex-now-supporting-native-mercurial.aspx

What would you prefer ? Myself I prefer mercurial, just for the ability to do local commits on my laptop offline and push the changesets to the repository later. The advanced branching / merging of forks is interesting too for an experimental opensource project.

For enabling mercurial instead of svn we just need to ask the codeplex support ... 

Coordinator
Feb 25, 2011 at 12:32 PM

I've read about Mercurial, but never used it - I'm looking for something to use for my own projects so will give it a go if you recommend. Happy to go with what you think best.

Coordinator
Feb 26, 2011 at 3:04 AM

Asked Codeplex support , they enabled it, I commited locally and pushed here the original xna4  version and then commited/pushed the modifications I made since 2 days ;)

What I really like with mercurial vs svn  is that there is no garbage .svn subfolders in your sources, so you can commit something and do some copy paste of code from another folder, and the source control only sees the new or changed files.

I use tortoisesvn from the windows explorer, like in the url in the first post. Only trick was to close the commit window after entering my username and password, it was asking for username in infinite loop.