Better SCM Initiative : Comparison
Note about Relevance
As of 2018, this site has become mostly irrelevant.
Introduction
This is a comparison between various version control systems, on an item-by-item basis. Its HTML file is self-contained and can be easily sent as an attachment.
If there's something you feel should be added, or wish to correct the information of a version control system or add information about a new one, see the "How to Contribute" page.
The Comparison Itself
Covered Systems
- CVS
- AccuRev
- Aegis
- AllChange
- Arch Revision Control System
- Bazaar
- BitKeeper
- IBM Rational ClearCase
- CM+ by Neuma
- CMSynergy by Telelogic
- Code Co-Op
- Darcs
- Fortress
- Fossil
- Git
- LibreSource Synchronizer
- Mercurial
- Monotone
- OpenCM
- Perforce
- PureCM
- SourceAnywhere by DynamSoft
- Subversion
- Superversion
- Surround SCM
- svk
- Team Foundation Server by Microsoft Corp.
- Vault
- Vesta
- Visual SourceSafe by Microsoft Corp.
Sources of the Comparison
The comparison is generated from an XML file by a Perl script. The script uses XML-LibXML, the Perl 5 bindings to libxml, and XML::CompareML. To use the makefile, you need GNU Make. Following are the sources:
- scm-comparison.xml - the XML source of the comparison
- gen-dtd.pl - a Perl script to generate the DTD.
- render.pl - a Perl script to render the comparison into HTML.
- bk-license.html - a note about the BitKeeper license.
- Makefile - a makefile to automate the task of maintaining the comparison.
- render-docbook.pl - a Perl script to render the comparison into DocBook/XML.
- compare-ml.xsl - an XSLT stylesheet to render the XML into HTML.
Other Comparisons
- How does Subversion compare to the XYZ Version Control System? - a list of links to comparisons and other resources by Gabor Szabo.
- Comparison of Arch to Subversion and CVS - on the Arch wiki.
- Comments on Open Source SCM Systems - by David A. Wheeler.
- The Wikipedia Comparison of Version Control Software
