Any thoughts on Surround scm?

Question

So looking at different version control systems: subversion, accurev, surround, tfs, bitkeeper/git/mercurial

• Subversion: I see it's quite the popular standard
• Accurev: There seems to be a love hate relationship around it.
• Surround and TFS: I haven't seen many comments around them.
• Bitkeeper/Git/Mercurial: Seem pretty popular, but I think "distributed" may scare my manager lol

For some reason he seems attracted to Surround and it's not because of sales pitch. We had originally downloaded it for evaluation played around with it but nothing came of it. So now we are back to looking at scm and wants to try it again. So far I haven't seen any buzz around it like some other version control systems. Same for TFS

Answer 1

Surround SCM.

Pros:

• Can apply a development work flow for all files. No two revisions of a file can be in the same status in the work flow.
• Has a good UI.
• Good licensing system.

Cons:

• Stores all data in a RDBMS.. heading for a performance problem if the repo size is huge.
• Does not support atomic commits. (you can do atomic commits but the files are still revisions and cannot be refereed using the changelist #)

---

My ideas about other tools

Subversion suits well for a corporate setup. Perforce is like subversion but faster and has a good UI, simple licensing terms and really super support system. Recently Accurev has gained a strong footing with its innovative branching methodology.

IMHO. go for tool sets that interact well with your defect tracking, test case management and build management solution. This would help you create a good developer ecosystem thereby saving time.