Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Can someone recommend a version control engine + GUI that will be good for non-technical users? I'm perfectly fine with using Subversion with my team of developers, but I want to find something that will help the rest of our company.
We are a design firm that deal with these type of files: Photoshop, Vectorworks, Microsoft Office, PDFs, etc.
I find GUIs such as SVNx and even Versions(which is pretty nice) too difficult and techy for our designers to use. It's hard for them to understand the idea of working directories and its relationship to a repository.
We are a small company and don't have a huge budget so we would like to stay opensource if possible.
Drop Box.
If you use TortiousCVS|SVN, its not too bad. Its a GUI/file based approach so its fairly straight forward. I've had non-technical people use it and like it.
If your non-techies are on a Mac, I would recommend SVN with Cornerstone from Zennaware. It's not open-source, but not expensive either. Our designers love it and it's got a great GUI.
Doesn't SharePoint come with Windows Server? It can handle file versions.
I can say that Subversion and Perforce are both problematic to non-technical users. We have been using Perforce as a document repository with some success. Though we have had more mistakes and problems than I care to talk about. We had slightly more success with Subversion and TortoiseSVN but even it was too difficult to most non-programmers to wrap their heads around. Though if you are lucky enough to have Mac OSX in the office, I would give rich's suggestion a try.
I would recommend looking for a CMS that supports history instead of a source repository. You should be able to find something out there that will do the job without too much work on your part.
I'd suggest SharePoint or Confluence. They both have a WebDAV interface which allows you to directly open and close files in the repository from Office and other current applications. SharePoint works better with Microsoft Office, as there are Microsoft specific WebDAV extensions in Office. Additionally, Confluence only offers WebDAV through a plugin.
Both of them are commercial products, though Confluence does have a shared source license, allowing you to make local modifications.
Bazaar has a pretty straightforward interface for the basic version-control tasks.
At some level, you're going to have to explain the basic concepts even to non-technical folk for them to make any use of it (there's no real way to "hide" the concept of committing your changes, for instance), but at the very least Bazaar's UI makes it pretty simple to do so, and keeps the option complexity down.
I recommend to check NeverOverwrite.
It keeps all versions of your files automatically. Sounds like an an ideal solution for non-developer.
How about a Wiki with some minimal version control built in ... like mediawiki
Why do you use source repository control for binary files like Photoshop, Vectorworks, Microsoft Office, PDFs, etc? I think Content Management System works better for you. Try using Alfresco, it's opensource and powerful.
I find sourcetree extremely intuitive for git/mercurial (no support for svn). It is for Mac and windows. It makes common operations like switching branches, merging, branching, reverting - which otherwise would be painful - quite easy.
But for your case I think VC solutions (that was built for coders) is not optimal as you will not be able to see differences between two versions of files as .psd, .doc, .pdf - these cannot be handled by the internal diff tool - so you are missing a lot of the power of version control
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
First of all, we're all beginners, so I am really sorry if this is a trivial question.
We're developing a game in Unity3D. We have two programmers, and one artist. We'd like to make our life easier by not just simply communicating via Facebook and sending our stuff back and forth. I know about GitHub, but I have a couple of problems with it.
It's not free for closed source projects - which would be ideal. Is there an alternative? Is this even the right kind of site to use?
Stupid reason, but I just can't comprehend how it works/how to use it. Is there an easy tutorial for it or something?
Is it even 'compatible' with Unity3D? Since I don't really know how
GitHub works, this might also be a really stupid question.
First of all you can use Bitbucket to host your stuff. Its like github without the open source community.I'm using it on a similar project I'm working on with some guys. It's important you understand that git is version control software developed by Linus Torvalds (creator of the Linux kernel). Git can be used to "commit" changes to a project. Then your other coder could grab those code(script in unity?) files and load them into him project. It is kind of overwhelming to learn to use at first, but it gets easy once you get it. Really learning to use git is one of the best things you can do for yourself.
As far as using git goes, I use linux so I can just 'man git' to look at commands and then use said commands in the shell. Mac uses bash so it probably is run right from the shell there too. Honestly I don't know at all for windows.
Here are a couple of resources:
https://try.github.io/levels/1/challenges/1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI3yVcSahzk
If I had more time I would look for a really good one for you, but I'm going to be late for work!
I have developed some Unity3D projects using GitHub before. So to answer question 3 and the last part of 1 first, yes Unity projects use a file-system architecture that is perfectly compatible with GitHub and once your used to it it is a great tool for team development.
Answer for question 1:
GitHub is just a name brand for a centralized version control system and there are other brands out there with similar offerings such as bit bucket. Google this term for more info. also look into distributed version control as well.
In all honesty though, if your new to developing, the product you will be making will most likely not be of much interest to other people on GitHub and your public repository will probably go unnoticed. If you believe that what you are creating is of such great value it needs to be kept secret, then investing a few dollars a month in a premium service is recommended anyway.
For other options, one would be to set up a central Git repository on a server (or one of your home computers) that you or one of you project mates is running. This might be a more complicated method but you would learn a lot of other useful things along the way.
Answer for question 2:
See -https://guides.github.com/activities/hello-world/- for github's intro tutorial. Also Youtube has some decent offering if you search for how to use Git Hub.
It can be a little daunting to work with something new and attempt to understand the documentation. If you are planning on getting serious about development though, especially in a corporate setting, you need to learn GIT and practice reading and understanding documentation.
Good Luck!
I recommend git for just about any text-based version control. If the files are binary heavy, it still works but it's not git's strength.
Until you get the central hosting worked out, you can use git bundle to share the changes offline.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 12 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Version Control. Getting started…
I am interested in implementing version control for the first time. I am starting to amass custom libraries and would like to know what methods you would recommend for implementing version control on a Windows Vista OS. I also have an Ubuntu server setup. I'm not sure if OS is relevant.
Also, if it is relevant, I primarily use PHP and AS3.
Thanks!
Usually I recommend either GIT or SVN. If you use Windows, SVN may be a better option (I believe the GIT binaries are still in beta for Windows, and the SVN clients are better). I'd also recommend registering for a hosted version system (such as github or beanstalk). Most services offer a free option, and will provide far better data replication than an any individual could create. Lastly, check out a GUI client (such as Tortise SVN) or check for integrations with the IDE you use for editing code.
The tutorial at http://hginit.com/ covers a lot of ground regarding the concepts behind version control, specifically distributed version control. Mercurial is the focus of the tutorial, but the concepts extend to git as well, and to other SCMs to a small degree.
My biggest recommendation is just to start using some version control, right now. It'll change the way you work--honestly.
(full disclosure: I work for Fog Creek, the sponsor of the hginit tutorial)
Last question first: what language you're using doesn't really matter. Even for text documents, Word documents, etc., a source control system will keep track of your versions.
As for which one to use, there are a number of free ones available, that require different levels of administration and expertise. If you're mostly comfortable with Windows programs, SourceGear licenses their Vault product free for single users.
Open source repositories are also not uncommon. Subversion is widely used, but does require a fair amount of server administration expertise.
For an individual, Bazaar in Solo mode is very easy to use. Later if you want a multi-user configuration, other "workflows" are possible.
Go with something like http://beanstalkapp.com
SVN is probably more conceptually easy to understand than Git, and it has more users - hence more tools and easier to find help.
I'd recommend Subversion (SVN) using the Red Bean Subversion book as a guide. Start with Appendix A, then go through chapters 1, 2 at least.
This is my recommendation primarily because it is how I started with version control, not because I think SVN is better than other version control systems.
I agree with Kevin Gessner just start using something and feel the change wash over you!
We use Mercurial. It is fast.
Git, Mercurial, or Bazaar
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
It seems like a lot of people here and on many programmer wikis/blogs/ect. elsewhere really dislike VSS. A lot of people also have a serious dislike for cvs. In many places I have heard a lot of differing opinions on whether or not using VSS or cvs is better or worse then using no source control, please rate the worst and explain why!!!!! you rated them this way. Feel free to throw in your own horrible system in the rankings. If you feel it depends on the circumstances try to explain the some of the different scenarios which lead to different rankings.
(note:I see a lot of discussion of what is better but little of what is worse.)
second note: while both answers are nice I'm looking less for good replacements and more for a comparison of which is worse and more importantly why!
No source control at all is the worst option, no need to discuss this and this is actually not an option.
I've used VSS once (10 years ago) and apart from the fact that it had very poor third party tools support, I'll just mention that the repository got corrupted several times (sigh). This surely explain why I don't trust VSS at all and would prefer any open source tools alternative (can't be worse).
If I can avoid CVS, I do it. It kinda works, is widely supported but really lacks important features (the most important one being atomic commits). But it works (it's better than nothing or VSS).
I've used Borland Starteam on a big project. Non technical people may appreciate it's client UI but it was lacking too much important things for developers: no nice IDE integration (even in JBuilder, what an irony), no post-commit hooks, no efficient Java API (to use with Maven for example), damn slow on WAN, etc plus some other very annoying glitches (like the UI not showing directories not in view). Not horrible, but there are better solutions.
ClearCase has been a bad experience, perfect for anti-agile development (was driving me mad). And so was PVCS (a nightmare). I don't even know what to say / where to start: expensive, heavy, poor tooling, etc. People buying these tools can't be the one using them, it's not possible.
Subversion was meant to be the successor of CVS, a better CVS (by providing the missing features), is widely used, is supported by many tools and is still very recommendable. Better than any of the previous solutions.
Then we have DVCS like Mercurial, Git which are more powerful, but require more skills to be used and are still lacking of tools support/integration (using the command line is not an option for everybody). Still, they are recommendable, depending on the context (not everybody needs more power) and Mercurial would have my preference because I find it more friendly.
This is nicely summarized on this picture from Martin Fowler's VersionControlTools page:
He must have read my mind when he wrote this page :)
In my experience -
Git > SVN > CVS > PVCS > none > VSS
Reasoning -
1.) Git - nice distributed model; initially some lack of support on Windows, but now works with any OS; lots of tool/IDE support.
2.) SVN - pretty standard; there can be a small amount of pain setting up server initially, but nothing major; works with pretty much everything.
3.) CVS - old; kind of a pain to work with; but still works with pretty much everything (OS, IDE, tools).
4.) PVCS - proprietary; not integrated into many tools/IDEs; overcomplicated workflow compared to other modern version control system.
4.) none - definitely not preferred, but at least you aren't fooling yourself. This is still pretty inexcusable in this day and age with so many options and Source Control being such a well known best practice.
5.) VSS - definitely not preferred; mostly replaced by TFS; unstable; can silently fail; worse than nothing because you're fooling yourself that it will actually keep your source safe.
The thing about VSS is:
it is a virtual certainty that if you use VSS for any length of time it will eventually corrupt it's repository and require restoring from backup.
that's not even the biggest disadvantage to using it
A batch script that makes a zip of a source folder archive with today's date as the filename is about 10% more powerful and 5x more reliable than VSS.
No source control is definitely worst. You need to keep a history and backup of your code, even if you program by yourself.
Then I would say VSS. I've used it (years ago) and it works, but is basically nothing like a modern source control system. It's better than nothing, but since there are so many free options that work great, I wouldn't really recommend VSS unless you're unfortunate to be in a "MS-Only" shop and have the mindset of "We'll use it 'cause it came with MSDN" which unfortunately I've see too often.
A tiny step above VSS is SourceGear Vault. http://www.sourcegear.com/vault/ It's a 3rd party source control that is basically rewritten from scratch VSS but works better with remote users. I wouldn't really recommend this either, but if it's all you can get approved, is an option.
CVS is better than these. It's free, open source, provides good history and branching/merging support, and enables concurrent development without locking.
SVN is better still and the choice of many. It's free, open source, but also has commercial backing from a number of sources (i.e., you can buy support if you need it). There are many great tools available and it provides very good concurrent development without locking.
The next step is newer distributed version control systems like Git or Mercurial. As far as I understand it, in these systems each user usually gets a complete copy of the repo and has their own local set of branches and history. They can work 100% locally including commits and branches and rollbacks and everything, and when ready, push a set of changes upstream. This can continue in many different configurations fulfilling a variety of needs.
Perforce >>>> CVS > VSS > SVN.
Perforce is the best by far. Everything works fine. I use it mainly integrated in IDE because the integration was good. I use the interface for more advanced tasks.
CVS worked fine, though it was command line only (i used an old version).
VSS was merely ok. It became way too slow after the team grows to 10 people. It was an old version though.
SVN is currently what i use and its non-functionning. At least Tortoise SVN. Status often wont update in explorer, it often fails to track the history of modifications, you always need to clean up their database and their tree is confusing. I would rather do the source control manually than using this tool. But it is not my call so i am stuck with it in my current job, sigh....
VSS is good to use for source control.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
Which version control system would you recommend for:
single user
looking for simple, easy to use
generally small simple projects
working on windows
usually coding python
no server
Use would be more finding old code than complicated branching situations.
From other similar posts, Bazaar and Mercurial seem the best distributed version control systems for my needs. I'm somewhat leaning towards Bazaar as it seems simpler.
The main complaint I read about Baazar was that it was slow, but speed was to be improved in version 2, to be released this summer. The new version has not yet been released, but there is a 2.0.0rc2.
I'm wondering if anything has changed recently or if anyone has any strong feelings on the subject.
EDIT: After reading the responses and browsing some alternatives, I'm going with Bazaar, at least for the moment. For my needs, the products mentioned seemed rather similar. Bazaar has documentation specifically aimed at a solo developer and seems rather easy to use. Others seem more aimed at groups or those with central servers. Other systems may be as good, but I thought starting to use something was more important than spending time trying to find the perfect program.
Thanks, everyone!
(Should I have written this as an edit, an answer or a comment?)
If you're just single developer working on small projects, any version control system should be fast enough.
I'm a Mercurial developer myself and will of course recommend that :-) I like how Mercurial has one central concept: the changeset graph. The graph resides inside a repository (a clone). You can have several lines of development in the same clone. This can be in the form of multiple heads, perhaps marked with the bookmarks extension or as named branches. You can also use several clones to keep things separated, or you can go back and forth: it is easy to separate a combined clone (use hg clone -r REV to obtain part of the revision graph). See this blog post for pretty pictures.
For Windows (and other platforms too) you have TortoiseHg, which gives you a very nice graphical interface. TortoiseHg also integrates with many excellent plugins for Mercurial, in particular the record extension, which lets you pick out individual changes from a file when you commit. Using that, you can edit several files, and then commit those changes as several independent changesets.
Finally, you should also know about Mercurial: The Definitive Guide, the free online book about Mercurial.
Bazaar is very good for your needs, and I'm doubt you found speed issues with your projects. Bazaar has very nice GUI front-end called Bazaar Explorer which I'd recommend over TortoiseBzr. (Bazaar Explorer bundled into standard 2.0 installer now.)
Of course if you choose Mercurial you don't lose much.
So you'd better test one and another and make your choice. Every zealot will recommend you his favorite.
If you're a Windows user, nothing IMO can beat TortoiseSVN in terms of usability and ease-of-use.
Definitely Subversion....
It's free, very very easy to set up and use, doesn't require a server because it can just access the local filesystem, and you can find loads and loads of documentation and help if you get stuck because I think there are far more people who use SVN than bazaar or git for example....
You can just download TortoiseSVN (http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/) en start using it....Nothing else is required for getting started because tortoisesvn has subversion built-in I believe....
I've done some playing with all of them.
The key thing that has attracted me to Bazaar is its flexibility.
Want to operate in centralized mode (ala SVN)? You can do that. Want to operate in distributed mode (ala Mercurial or git)? You can do that.
And here's where it gets better: you can do both. Say you're working with a guy that came over from SVN and he just doesn't like the distributed concept one little bit. Fine. Let him work in centralized mode while the rest of the team works in distributed mode. If he's away from the central repository, he can even take his checkout offline and do offline commits while he's gone. Then he can commit them all when he gets back.
While some of the other systems have ways to approximate different models, none seem as committed to flexibility as bazaar.
I have used SVN, Git and Bzr quite extensively on various different projects. I am currently using Bzr on a single user project and it is very easy to set up and use. No need to set up a server and comes with TortoiseBzr which works well, it may not be as feature complete as TortoiseSVN is but for a one-man project you should have everything you need. There are a few things missing such as the ability to Tag revision in which case you need to resort to using the command line interface. I considered Mercurial about a year ago, but I haven't used it in a real-world situation yet so I wouldn't be able to compare. I decided against it because TortoiseHG didn't seem very mature at the time, I expect it will have improved since then.
I quite like darcs, it uses something called patch theory which is, as far is I know, unique in version control software.
I have been using Bazaar for a while and was pretty happy with it. With all the hype going on about git, I gave it a try. And even though it has pretty complex concepts, I can only say that it was worth the switch. I now use it for all my projects. No matter how small. And I think TortoiseGit has become good enough to be usable.
I can see the following good points about it:
It's fast
Branching and merging is so simple you could even say it's fun
It's got funky commands I haven't seen anywhere else (f.ex.: stash and rebase)
It's hyped. Consequently the community is quite active and you can find a lot of material on it
You can grab a copy of gitorious to manage your projects privately
Some things I don't like as much:
branch display in gitk "feels" strange to me
I use git and it works great for me. I use msysgit on Windows.
I will recommend Git always. It is fast, doesn't need server, branching and merging is excellent. For Windows you need to get MsysGit.
Mercurial is also very good with a bit easier interface for user.
What would be the best version control system to learn as a beginner to source control?
Anything but Visual Source Safe; preferably one which supports the concepts of branching and merging. As others have said, Subversion is a great choice, especially with the TortoiseSVN client.
Be sure to check out (pardon the pun) Eric Sink's classic series of Source Control HOWTO articles.
I'd suggest you try Subversion, for example with the 1-click SVN installer. Try searching SO for "Subversion", and you'll find loads of questions with answers that point to good tutorials.
Good luck!
I'd go straight for Git. I've used subversion before, but always felt like I was doing it wrong. Git made sense from day one.
Useful resources:
Linus Torvals on Git
Scott Chacon "Getting Git"
There are a few core concepts that I think are important to learn:
Check-ins/check-outs (obviously)
Local versions vs. server versions
Mapping/Binding a local workspace to a remote store or repository.
Merging your changes back into a file that contains changes from
others.
Branching (what it is, when/why to use it)
Merging changes from a branch back into a main branch or trunk.
Most modern source control systems require some knowledge of the above topics and should help facilitate you learning them. Then you have distributed source control, which I don't have any experience with but is supposed to be fairly complicated and may not be suitable for a beginner.
Subversion is great because it has all of the modern features you'd want and is free.
Git is also becoming an increasingly popular option and is another free or very low cost alternative to Subversion. Knowledge regarding the concepts of branching and merging become critical for using Git, however.
You can use unfuddle as a free and easy way to experiment with both Git and Subversion. I use it to host a couple of subversion repositories for some side projects I've worked on in the past.
I'm not and advanced source control user, but I'm learning. Here is my experience with source control products:
A long time ago, the company I was working for at the time decided to use source control. They introduced the concept to developers and got eveyone willing to give it a try. They chose to use PVCS, and implemented it. Before too long, developers would have to coordinate to lock/unlock modules and objects and we really didn't see much benefit.
A few years later, I was playing around with making an open source project and at the time rubyforge was offering CVS repositories. I tried it out and it was marginally better than PVCS. Granted I was the only one using the repository. I did however become frustrated when I tried to rearrange the structure of my files because I didn't like the way I had initially imported them. It didn't really work out in CVS.
A few years after that I was working on another personal project and my web hosting provider offered easy to setup Subversion (SVN) repositories. It took me a little bit of research to get it up and running correctly, but once I got past the initial learning curve, I liked it.
Not long after that I realized that I liked having source control and that my current job didn't have it. So I evangelized, and after a long period of time, my team implemented Source Safe because we work in Visual Studio and are generally a Microsoft shop. I was eager to use it, but before long I found that I was losing files and that Visual Studio was putting things in the wrong place and that I'd work on a project for a while and then go to export my work to another location and find that it either wouldn't export or would only export some of the projects in a solution. This made me realize that even though I thought I was using a "version control system", the copy of the code that was most secure, robust and complete was my working copy. The exact opposite of what source control is supposed to do.
So last week I was so fed up with Source Safe that I went searching. After looking into a few solutions, I decided to try git. I won't say it's all been roses, since I have again had some learning curve to get it to do what I want it to do, However, I have liked it enough to convert all of my work and personal projects over to it. One of the really nice things about it is that I don't need a centralized repository so I can use it without going through a ton of red tape at work to get it installed.
So in short I would reccommend git, I use Mysysgit in windows and it has the added bonus of giving me a bash shell. On Linux you can just install it from your package manager. If you don't like git, try subversion. If you don't like either of those you probably won't like CVS or PVCS either. Under no circumstances try Source Safe, it's awful.
I found http://unfuddle.com saved me messing about with installing SVN or git. You can get a free account in there and use either of those - plus you can use your OpenID there.
Then you avoid having to mess about setting it up right and focus on how you're going to use it!
Vault from SourceGear.com is superb. It is free for single users and provides a superb VS 2005/2008 interface. I love it!
rp
#Ian Nelson:
I agree with you that Source Safe is bad as a source control system, but keep in mind that using Source Safe is a lot better than "carrying around floppy disks" as Joel Spolsky said.
For a beginner it might not be a bad idea, since the cost of having no source control at all is a lot higher.
Each tool has it's strengths and weaknesses. It's very much a question of what your requirements are. Unfortunately with this issue, like many others, it's often not the best tool that is selected but the one that someone is familiar with. For instance, if you don't require many branches and your team is small and local, almost any vcs will do the job (except SourceSafe). Things change if you need branches (which almost by necessity means you also need to do merges), your team is distributed, you need advanced security (subcontractors are not allowed to entire source tree), task tracking, etc. There is also the question of cost in three different ways: cost of licenses, cost of maintenance (some tools are so complicated that you in practice need someone just to control the repositories) and cost of training.
Therefore suggesting one tool over another is like suggesting what would be the best programming language.
Just some pointers:
StarTeam is the easiest of the tools
I have used. It required very little
training. I got a one-day training
since I was to be the maintainer.
This maintaining took me less than 30
minutes per week. Users I "trained"
by writing a two-page manual and
after that I had very few questions
to answer.
Continuus was the other end of the
scale as far as ease of use is
concerned. On the other hand task handling was great and it offered good support for release management. Trouble is, even as a release manager I never thought ease of making releases (it was once you learned how, but that took a considerable amount of time) should be more important than the daily work that developers do.
Merging and branch creating differs
wildly between tools. Some tools make
this simple, like git and ClearCase
(although the latter is very slow)
some basically force you to do the
merge by hand. If you need to do
merges a lot, the cost can get high.
ClearCase was also expensive in all
three categories mentioned before
(although it has to be said we used
all the advanced stuff which isn't
necessary). Git on the other hand
lacks a good UI and some of concepts
differ from what you might be used
to. Git's security features are also
lacking (gitosis addresses some
issues but not all).
Most tools I have used are also quite
slow. Tools like PVCS/Dimensions was
just slow, no matter what (basic
things like opening a directory in
the repository), some very slow in
more specific ways (like ClearCase).
From the tools I have used I would select StarTeam if your developers are not very experienced (and if you don't mind paying the license, which is quite expensive) and git if you have some experienced vcs guys onboard who can set up the environment to other guys. Mercurial also looks like an interesting competitor and seems to have slightly better UI's.
Continuus, PVCS/Dimensions and ClearCase are just too slow, too complex and too expensive for almost any project. If someone insist on selecting one of these, I would go for ClearCase.
I haven't used Subversion which many seem to like (yet, I have a feeling this is about to change in the near future) so can't comment how it compares to the other tools I have used (usually as a build and/or release manager).
As for the first tool to choose, problem with Git, Bazaar and Mercurial is they are distributed vcs's. This is different from the traditional server-client model where you have a central repository. For just learning the stuff I would recommend also reading about the concepts. Branching for instance is something that you might not understand correctly just by trying yourself (there are different branch strategies for different situations). Plus it is very different if you are the only one accessing the repository, merge conflicts for instance wouldn't be a problem (you might get to see them but you would easily also fix them since you know the code in both branches). Of course you would learn about check outs, check ins, and such but I don't think these issues are particularily difficult in the first place.
Added problem with vcs's is that they tend to use different terms. In StarTeam which is otherwise easy to use they for some reason insist on using the terms "check out" and "check out and lock". The latter is what most people think the first does. There is a reason for this (you can edit files even if you don't have an exclusive lock), but it would still make much more sense to call these "Get" and "Check out" to avoid confusion.
Anything, but I would learn a modern system like git or subversion myself. My first VCS was RCS, but I got the basics down.
Well, if you are just wanting to learn on your own, I would say you should go with something free, like subversion. If you are a company who has never used source control before, then it really depends on your needs.
My first exposure was CVS with WinCVS as a client. it was horrid. Next was Subversion, with TortoiseSVN and Eclipse's integration. It was intuitive, and heavenly. I think that using CVS with TortoiseCVS and Eclipse's would be nice as well, though I prefer the way SVN handles revisioning. The entire repository is versioned with each check in, not individual files.
I'd also recommend Subversion. It does not take too long to set up, it is free, and there is a really good book available online that goes over the basics as well as some advanced topics: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
Subversion with tortoisesvn. (tortoisesvn because you can see a lot of what goes on visually and will provide a good jumping off point for the command line stuff. ) There is tons of documentation out there and most likely you will see it at least one point in your career. Almost every company I have worked for and interviewed with runs SVN.
If you're looking to learn a commercial product while getting started Perforce provides a free client and server, with the server supporting two users and five client workspaces.
At my previous place of employment it was used religiously not only for code by our programmers, but for art assets and game levels, and my own documentation.
Subversion is good place to start with. It is very stable and modern version control system.
Best online resource to start learning about Subversion would be Version Control with Subversion. There are lot of choices as far as server and client softwares are concerned. I personally prefer (for Windows environment).
VisualSVN server
TortoiseSVN shell-integrated client and
AnkhSVN Visual Studio Subversion Add-On
Again, with Subversion there are lot of options available. Also, it is a continually evolving version control system (unlike outdated SourceSafe). It could be easily integrated with numerous automated build tools (CruiseControl, FinalBuilder) and bug/issue tracking systems (JIRA).
If you are looking for state-of-the-art version control systems, go for Git(developed by Linus Torvalds). But if you are totally new to version control systems, I would suggest start with subversion.