I'm looking for a tool like Atlassian's FishEye. The alternatives I've found so far (like StatCVS, ViewCVS or Bonsai) are either lacking in features or are quite a pain to install and maintain. So before staying with one of these tools, I'd like to be sure I did not miss any other good, easy to install, open-source (prefereably java) version control-viewer which supports cvs as scm.
Another SVN tool which has repository browsing capabilities is Trac. This is nice because as well as a browser for the repository it also has a timeline showing commits. It also does bug tracking.
Warehouse is pretty cool
ViewVC is a good open source, web based, repository viewer similar to FishEye. I know you've looked at it, and you're right, it was a hassle to set up, but once setup, it's run without any intervention for almost three years for us.
There is also CVS Monitor, though it hasn't got the nearly the number of features as FishEye.
We use ViewCVS for repository browsing.
If you were using SVN I'd highly recommend Tortoise SVN.
Related
the company I work for have started to use Mercurial as our version control software, with NetBeans becoming the editor of choice for most developers.
Up until now we've been using WinMerge and KDiff3as our Mercurial merge tool, but have decided that we don't like it.
Now one of the things we've noticed about NetBeans is that it has a very nice diff tool built into it, so was hoping that there might be some way of using this as the Mercurial merge tool?
Can anyone let me know if this is possible, and if so, how?
(Or, are there any other windows diff/merge tools that are as good as the NetBeans diff tool?)
Cheers
I am not sure about using the NetBeans diff tool but as for other merge tools that will work well with Mercurial, I would recommend Perforce's Merge tool which I have heard is somewhat similar to the Netbeans one.
Another good one is DiffMerge.
As near as I can tell, there is no way to call Netbean's diff/merge tool from the command line, which is necessary to use it from Mercurial.
FWIW: I use Beyond Compare 3 for all of my diff / merge activities, even though I use Netbeans as a primary editor, and it does have Mercurial integration.
Functionally, I find the Beyond Compare interface to be a little easier, and it comes with a number of other features that I didn't think I needed, but have since grown completely dependent on, such as performing text diffs on entire folders, image diffs, and pushing changes between files that are being diffed.
I'm looking for an alternative version control software to TortoiseSVN/ Subversion. Only interested in those with a GUI and an easy installation process, though if multiple installations are needed (Such as vault, which needs both a client, server, and lots of other stuff), please give some installation instructions with your answer.
I'm a one man shop as of right now.
Use Mercurial and TortoiseHg.
Just as matter of interest why is it that you dont want to use subversion?
If you dont want to look after the subversion server and repos, you can always put them in places like assembla, or similar(i only used them and pretty happy wit the service and the value) , that for a small fee will look after all that and the integration with trac, etc.
And the integration tools with most IDEs are pretty good.
Other option is git, tho integration with windows is not great and this is something that you seem to be very interested in.
(I m not afiliated with assembla, just a happy customer so far)
I'd be interested in why you don't like SVN, but some alternatives that I have some experienve with and are free (atleast for one man shops):
CVS
Vault
Perforce
I like Perforce when in an environment with a lot of users (but then it starts costing serious money), but for my personal (one man) stuff, I use SVN - it's much easier to administer.
I second Bazaar -- I've recently been part of converting two teams to using it and it's been quite easy. (Think of it being like git, but able to work in the same way you're used to doing with svn, plus able to work on Windows.) Two people in my office are using TortiseBZR on Windows with good success. It's easy to set up a server too -- I had it done in less than 30 minutes and able to work with others. (The easiest/quickest way to do a server is over SFTP, but you can do it all on your machine too, if you'd like.)
I use GIT on windows with TortoiseGIT and i'm loving it! .
Git Extenions looks like a better way of using Git in Windows than the alternatives. It even comes with a Visual Studio plugin.
VisualSVN integrates directly into Visual Studio if you are working on the .net Framework. The developers of Stack Overflow used it!
PS: Its not free
Our small team of 3-4 developers uses a wiki for documentation and collaboration. I'm trying to put together a list of some solid extensions which would help make it better. We are using MediaWiki, but if you know of a good extension/plug-in for another platform I'd like to hear about that too. Thanks.
Here is my list so far:
Geshi for syntax highlighting.
FCKeditor
TagAsCategory
Promising Extensions that don't work w/ MediaWiki 1.15.0
CategoryEditor
IssueTracker
Two things come to mind:
Bug tracking tool integration
SCM tool integration
For MediaWiki there are already
Bugzilla integration:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:BugzillaReports
SVN integration:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SVNIntegration
The whole list of extensions is here
Well, I think that a good starting point would be to check what we use at mediawiki.org, because this is a Development Wiki :)
My first choice would be CodeReview of course. It's not pretty, but it's very useful. See how we use it: it allows to integrate a SVN into the wiki, to add comments on code, tag commits, and put statuses on it.
At MediaWiki, we use new/verified/ok chain, adding fixme/reverted/resolved/deferred when things go wrong; but you're free to use your own statuses here.
Subclipse, Subversive, or something else?
There's a bit of debate around the topic, can we come to some conclusion here?
EDIT:
It's been a couple months now, and I ended up deciding the plugin slowed Eclipse down too much, and was a hassle to use every time I changed a file from outside Eclipse.
I ditched the plugin all together and just went with TortiseSVN.
This depends. Subclipse has superior support for checking out projects as maven projects - this is the sole reason we use Subclipse. Other than that, I have noticed subclipse bugs with syncing with SVN.
Subversive is much better at detecting new files to add to version control, and is also far superior with merging code from a branch, or even syncing with SVN (fewer bugs, etc.). So really, you should ask yourself what value you want. If you're not using maven, I would definitely go for Subversive.
I've recently switched from subclipse to subversive. After upgrading our repository from v1.4.x to 1.5, we started having lots of issues with subclipse.
After doing a synch, you'd see updates that you had just accepted, and you wouldn't be able to take other updates without doing "hacks"
So far subversive is pretty nice. it even seems a little faster for lots of small files than subclipse was.
Personally i use subversive. It has better usability features, mainly intuitive keyboard shortcuts etc.
I have never had a problem using either though. It really is just a combination of personal preference and usage though, if you're using advanced complex features it might matter which one you choose, but if your just checking in, checking out and synchronizing they will both meet your needs.
I'm casting my vote for Subclipse. I've had better luck with it than Subversive personally.
subclipse is fully packed with features, I have never had an issue with it.
So I want to get a project on a distributed version control system, such as mercurial, git, or bazaar. The catch is that I need the Windows support to be good, i.e. no instructions that start off with "install cygwin...". Now I've heard that git's Windows support is decent these days, but don't have any first hand experience. Also, it sounds like the bazaar team has an explicit goal of making it as multiplatform as possible.
Can I get any recommendations?
I use msys-git on windows every single day. Works fast and flawlessly.
Although the newer build has some problems with git-svn, this build (Git-1.5.5-preview20080413.exe) has a working git-svn.
There's a nice comparison between git, hg and bzr in this InfoQ article. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. You'll have to think about your project and your workflows and choose the best fit. The good news is that they're all fairly good.
At last I checked, the only thing you need for Mercurial is Python and to grab a binary package. If you find yourself with more time and want to fiddle / build it yourself, look here.
The only real drawback with HG is its idea of branching .. but for some people that's a major plus.
I like it because its intuitive, easy to install and works on anything that Python does. I don't think that all of the available plugins will work for you, but most should.
I've had the best luck with Bazaar, followed by Mercurial. Never could get Git to work correctly. A quick search shows that Git still requires clunky emulation layers like Cygwin/MSYS, and I can't find any integration tools like TortoiseBzr for Git.
With Mercurial in Windows, I had several minor issues (insensitive paths, symlinks, ). They were usually fixed eventually, but I felt that the same quality of testing was not applied to running on Windows as for the other platforms. Bazaar also had better documentation for integrating with native applications like Visual C.
EDIT: Perhaps add a "dvcs", "distrubutedversioncontrol", "distrubuted"
I've used Mercurial on Windows with no problems. You can use TortoiseHG or just use the command line. Mercurial does require Python, but that is easy to install in Windows as well.
Mercurial Binary Packages
I agree with basszero. I'm using mercurial under windows and it's as easy and reliable as it can get. My development team is spread over Europe (well Dublin and Vienna :-).
We use VPN to commit or sometime the built in webserver (hgserve). Both work fine with no problems out of the box.
Also diff3 open source tool works perfect with mercurial and TortoiseHG out of the box.
If you are concerned about an easy to use interface:
The bazaar folk now include TortoiseBzr in their windows binary package. That's got to be a pretty strong indicator that they think it is up to snuff. I don't know what the maturity/stability of TortoiseHg is, but there certainly isn't a decent GUI interface for git yet, and the MSYS git build still needs some work IMO.
If your team are comfortable with or prefer the command line, then either bazaar or mercurial would probably work well for you, and are both probably about the same in terms of learning curve. Git's learning curve is much higher. It is like the swiss-army knife that is almost wider than it is long, with all the little gadgets and do-dads in it and hanging off it, with the springs so tight that you occasionally slice a finger open trying to prise a blade out.
In my experience using GIT on windows is a major pain. But I have been using Fossil SCM for some time now, and I think it actually fits your needs exactly.
It also has a built in Ticket system and a Wiki. And the whole program is contained in 1 file and it works right out of the box.
I totally recommend it.
Here is a link to the site http://www.fossil-scm.org/
Remember, this site is self hosting, what that means is you are looking at the web interface to fossil it self, when you look at tickets and the wiki and documentation, you actually are using fossil.
But if your project has millions of lines of code and is a few gigabytes in size, you have to use GIT, there is no way around that problem.
Enjoy.