• From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
• To: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
• Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:46:10 +0100

On 18 September 2011 03:46, John Cowan <cowan@m...> wrote:
> Scripsi:
>
>> > On the client-side, Tortoise SVN is a really nice client configuration for
>> > Windows.  It is easy to get non-technies up-to-speed easily.  My
>> > environment has been Linux server and Windows clients.
>>
>> Tortoise also comes in a CVS flavor at tortoisecvs.org.
>
> Git, Bzr, and Mercurial too.

I wouldn't just go with distributed version control... its not easy to
understand and often the teams involved will spend more time learning
the concepts and commands than doing any work.  You really have to be
sure the benefits will outweigh the large costs involved.  It really
isn't for everyone.

Subversion is simple, the process is simple to understand, tools are
well advanced etc.  If I had to make the decision and the team
involved didn't have any dvcs experience, I would always go with svn
first.

As for diffing xml, working at the text file level is fine, just like
it is for all the other file types involved.


-- 
Andrew Welch
http://andrewjwelch.com

• References:
  • Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In A Production Environment
    • From: "Len Bullard" <cbullard@h...>
  • Re: Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In A Production Environment
    • From: "Betty Harvey" <harvey@e...>
  • Re: Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In AProduction Environment
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>
  • Re: Is CVS A Practical Means to Manage XML Versions In AProduction Environment
    • From: John Cowan <cowan@m...>