

CodePlex now supports Git - Marwan
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/codeplex/archive/2012/03/21/git-commit-m-codeplex-now-supports-git.aspx

======
revscat
One VCS to rule them all...

Having gone through different VCSs of varying (mostly poor) quality and cost
over the span of my career, I am glad to see that that a de facto standard
seems to be being settled on. Git is quite good, far better than any other
solution I have used on a day-to-day basis. (No disrespect intended to
Mercurial, etc.)

While having a breadth of technological solutions to problems is frequently a
benefit, I'm not sure source code control falls into this category. This is an
area ripe for de facto standardization. Developers should be able to go to a
new job without having to relearn the intricacies of MKS, SVN, etc.

~~~
manuletroll
While I'm all for abandoning old and often awful VCSs, I do think there's room
for some diversity. Git's not really my thing, and I'm happy to be able to use
an alternative. Most DVCSs work in very similar ways, and for standard use, I
don't think there is a huge learning curve for someone switching between git
and mercurial, for instance. Some other tools have their own benefits, like
fossil with its nice integrated web project management features. All in all,
I'd be quite sad to see only git everywhere.

~~~
ajross
Obviously no one should be forcing you to use what you don't like. But I don't
quite understand that reasoning. Except for rare circumstances, SCM use isn't
a "personal" activity. It's not about what you pick for yourself, it's about
what everyone collectively chooses to use for collaboration.

And in that sense, there are _really high_ costs to variety. Imagine a world
where you need to be fluent not just in whichever two of
RCS/CVS/subversion/git are currently en vogue, but also mercurial, SCCS,
bitkeeper, Perforce, ClearCase, etc... That's a mess.

So sure, git might not be "your thing", but I strongly suspect you'd still
prefer a git-only world to one where every project you want to tinker with
uses a different SCM.

~~~
manuletroll
By "I don't like git", I mostly meant that git's not my favourite VCS, not
that I'd refuse to use it or actively advocate against it or anything. I'll
always use what's most convenient for the team as a whole. The point was that
when I have a choice, I'd rather use mercurial than git. But really, those two
are really close. There's even a plugin that lets you use interact with git
repos from mercurial.

And of course I can only agree with your last sentence, a bit of
standardization is a good thing.

------
jabits
Right on Microsoft! It's great to see a software powerhouse able to turn its
entire outlook about to keep it's users coming back. Between the ever
wonderful Visual Studio IDE, and MS's new-found appreciation for how open-
source can enhance it's position, it's a good time to be a .Net dev.

~~~
skrebbel
Completely true, but Github still beats Codeplex by parsecs.

~~~
bunderbunder
They do different things. Github excels when it comes to community & source
management, but doesn't really do anything to help you set up a project home
page, manage official releases, or anything like that. Codeplex is more of a
Sourceforge-style "one stop project hosting" site.

~~~
cameronh90
They do have a way of setting up project pages: <http://pages.github.com/>

And each project has a download list which can contain official releases, or
you can just link to a tag as a zip download. Github also has a pretty decent
issue tracker and wiki.

------
josephcooney
Now if we could just get them to step away from TFS...

~~~
noveltyaccount
I love DVCS and used Mercurial for a year exclusively, but one thing that TFS
does really really well is lifecycle and issue management. The way you can put
a project plan (essentially) into it as a collection of work items and then
track burndown/earned-value as code checkins are occurring is really awesome.
My stand-by joke is that TFS would be an awesome lifecycle management tool if
only it had a good version control product. When you work in a large
enterprise (read: bureaucratic) where you have to satisfy a small army of
project managers who are watching the dollars tick by, TFS has many pros worth
considering.

~~~
m_st
I don't know TFS, but isn't it possible to just use the ALM tools for project
management and keep using mercurial, git, svn or whatever else you prefer as
VCS? Is the link between the two really required?

~~~
recursive
It's not required, but when you check code into TFS, you can associate it to a
backlog task in the UI. You'd miss that.

~~~
noveltyaccount
Correct. I used Mercurial with Redmine and you could tag your checkins with
special text " _closes_ #39" for example. It's quite a bit more cumbersome
than having a filtered query alongside your checkin dialog that you can just
tick a checkbox. Especially when your development team has a, let's say, mix
of skill levels.

