What we need is a version system, followed by git. In my personal opinion, if you only learn one, it is git. If you want to learn two, they are git and fossil. Fossi is more suitable for individual private projects than git. He cuts down some collaboration problems, and this is a very high-quality software. As for the comparison with git, I prefer that they are a software that optimizes different scenarios.
As for struggling with why there is such a judgment, you can try it yourself for up to one hour. I was shocked by the diff quality of fossil. All linguistic debates cannot replace the experience of the century.
Personally, I learned hg and then git, and I would 100% do that again if I were doing it over; my experience was that hg was much easier to learn, but that once I'd learned it git was pretty easy to pick up.
That's not a Git web interface, that's a completely different source control system altogether!
And from a quick bit of web searching, it looks like most IDE's out there either lack a plugin for fossil, or else have a plugin that's outdated and doesn't keep up with the current version of the IDE.
I realize that all of these "I Like X!" silly HN threads invite a lot of "I Like Y!" silly replies, but there sure are a lot of caveats on "better" here. You could make a much stronger case for recommending Subversion or CVS, lol.
yes, thank you.But light and self Hosted version control,I have to recommand fossil.Git is not gods,we can blame it and recommand other more better software for special case.
reply