[Jersey] Re: SVN, GIT or MERCURIAL for Jersey 2.0?

From: Markus Karg <>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:34:13 +0200

I wonder whether is the right forum to answer your question then: If you think it is better for the project that *you and your team* does not need to invest one or two hours into learning the few additional features of SVK (remember, it is just an extension of SVN) even if that means that lots of *users* have to learn either HG (GIT friends and SVN friends) or GIT (HG friends and SVN friends), which both approximately needs several days to understand AFAIK for the average SVN friends, then go for it. No need to ask *users* then, since obviously you would bother >50% (HG frends and SVN friends, or GIT friends and SVN friends). But if you want to know what is best for *users* then just stick with SVN as 100% of your current users already are using it to read your repo and 0% of the *users* will have a benefit from switching to either HG / GIT / SVK as *users* are not *developers*. So maybe the question is better placed at


-----Original Message-----
From: Marek Potociar []
Sent: Dienstag, 12. April 2011 15:26
Cc: Markus Karg
Subject: Re: [Jersey] Re: SVN, GIT or MERCURIAL for Jersey 2.0?

On 04/12/2011 09:00 AM, Markus Karg wrote:
> SVN is the most commonly used version control still, and it is currently
> used in the project without a real need to change.

Apart form the general reasons that I briefly mentioned in my initial email where we anticipate to make our everyday
developer lives easier, we are looking into improving project processes with regard to anticipated transition of the
main development focus from 1.x to 2.x, better user adoption, integration with other projects etc.

As for SVK, I am not familiar with it. Tatu is right that we want to consider primarily well-known choices.


So there should be
> good reasons to change. The sole reason I understand from the original
> posting is the wish for distribution. SVK provides exactly this. It is
> an extension to SVN that adds distribution. So it is the most obvious
> choice, since it keeps SVN but just adds the wanted functionality. The
> learning curve is a joke as it just adds very few commands ontop of SVN.
> GIT and HG enforce everybody to change to GIT or HG, even those pretty
> happy with SVN. I do not see why everybody should learn GIT or HG if the
> same could be done easily with a simple SVN extension.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tatu Saloranta []
> Sent: Montag, 11. April 2011 20:44
> To:
> Subject: [Jersey] Re: SVN, GIT or MERCURIAL for Jersey 2.0?
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Markus Karg <>
> wrote:
>> I'd vote to stick with SVN. But why not trying SVK?
> I think team is trying to choose from the obvious candidates, ones
> that are most used.
> So perhaps you could expand on why SVK should be considered over more
> well-known choices?
> -+ Tatu +-