I'm still in the middle of a quandry with regards to revision control.

90% of my open code is hosted via CVS at a central site.

I wish to migrate away from CVS in the very near future, and having ummed and ahhed for a while I've picked murcurial as my system of choice. There is extensive documentation, and it does everything I believe I need.

The close-runner was git, but on balance I've decided to choose mercurial as it wins in a few respects.

Now the plan. I have two options:

• Leave each project in one central site.
• Migrate project $foo to its own location.

e.g. My xen-tools could be hosted at mercurial.xen-tools.org, my blog compiler could live at mercurial.steve.org.uk.

Alternatively I could just leave the one site in place, ignoring the fact that the domain name is now inappropriate.

The problem? I can't decide which approach to go for. Both have plusses and minuses.

Suggestions or rationales welcome - but no holy wars on why any particular revision control system is best...

I guess ultimately it matters little, and short of mass-editing links its 50/50.

Tags: chronicle, cvs, cvsrepository, git, lazyweb, mercurial, todo | No comments