Windows Source Control for the Lone Developer?

Posted by Cliff on Monday April 19, 2004 @12:32PM from the version-control-on-a-budget dept.

bitFlipper asks: "I'm the sole developer of embedded software for a small company. Currently I'm maintaining about five different product lines, each with about 30K lines of code and 100+ files. At the moment I'm winging it without a version control system (using snapshots to CD-R), but this is an unhealthy state of affairs. The open source/big project model of many developers scattered across the globe doesn't apply here--it's just me. And since I have to provide my own tools, the budget for this is near zero. It also has to run on Win32. Oh, and the code I'm developing is not open source. I've looked at RCS (which is certainly simple, but maybe too simple) and Subversion (which is probably overkill). What can people recommend for a version control system that's free or low cost, Win32 compatible, and simple to set up, use and maintain?"

1 of 109 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

definitely go with CVS, or maybe perforce by Anonymous Coward · 2004-04-19 14:59 · Score: -1, Redundant

Yup, gotta second the CVS votes. Subversion is way too bloated. CVS is simple and time-tested, though it has some, uh, unique personality in the form of weird design choices and inability to rename files except by deleting and adding again.

In terms of interface, CVS and subversion are similar, subversion has cleaned up the interface a bit though.

I would also recommend looking at perforce simply because it works well, and would be free for you to use. However it is also way more than you need.

CVS is "good enough" and works everywhere and it's easy to hack (i.e. you could make a web page out of your repository, or generate a report of changes or whatever else.)