Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    text
    copied!<p>SVN and Mercurial are both good SCM. Many opensource projects use them. If your choice only narrowed down to these two then what you and your team must consider is:</p> <h2>Workflow and workflow</h2> <p>How do you want to do the commits and branching? Distributed or Purely centralized? This is related to the company policy too. Go with SVN if you want everything to be centralized. But this does not mean you can not have central repository with Mercurial. It's quite beneficial if your team choose DVCS like Mercurial because:</p> <ul> <li>Everyone has their own local copy. This enables them to work from home and do local commits</li> <li>Everyone can do local branching in their local machine. Do not fear about merging between revisions, Mercurial has good support with merging and relatively easy compared to SVN. </li> <li>Not everyone must have commits access, because you can appoint someone to be a gatekeeper which pulls revision from other developer's machine. This enables you to do code review before submitting the code to the central repository.</li> </ul> <p>Other than that, both are really good as they both have good (enough) performance, good windows support (<a href="http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SVN</a>, <a href="http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/TortoiseHg" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Hg</a>) and good documentation/book (<a href="http://svnbook.red-bean.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">SVN</a>, <a href="http://hgbook.red-bean.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Hg</a>).</p>
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload