On 31 October 2013 07:02, patrick vrijlandt <patrick.vrijla...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> > wrote: > >> Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >>> *Definitely* use source control. > >> > >> +1, but prefer to call it a “version control system” which is (a) more > >> easily searched on the internet, and (b) somewhat more accurate. > > > > Right. I've picked up some bad habits, and I think Dave may also > > have... but yes, "distributed version control system" is what I'm > > talking about here. > > > > ChrisA > > Thanks. Do you all agree that Mercurial is the way to go, or is there > another "distributed version control system" that I should shortlist? There are huge arguments all over the net on this topic. Having extensively used the top two contenders (Git and Mercurial) I would strongly advise you to use Mercurial. What it comes down to for me is that Mercurial usage fits in my head and I rarely have to go to the docs, whereas with Git I have to constantly go to the docs for anything but the most trivial usage - even when it's something I've done many times before. I'm always afraid that I'm going to do something *wrong* in Git. Tim Delaney
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
