bazaar

I've been playing around with Git recently to get a grasp of distributed version control. Now I'm looking at Bazaar, but can't figure out how to make a local branch, i.e. a branch that I do not have to push to when I want to commit changes. With Git, I would do git branch branch_name or git checkout -b branch_name I can then work in my local branch, committing changes as I go, without having to push changes to a remote repo. When I'm through with the branch, I can merge it to my local master branch. If I want, I can then push those changes to the remote repo. Is this possible with Bazaar?

I have been using Bzr for version control of my project over the last few months. I am the sole developer, and currently I just have everything in a single local project directory, to which I commit and which I sync to DriveHQ. I now have some large-scale experiments in mind which would likely break this main line, so I've been looking into the concepts of branches and shared repositories. So my question is, basically: how should I go about creating a new, shared repository from this already-version-controlled base? I am familiar with the SVN project structure of trunk, branches and tags, and

I have some friends that are potentially interested in learning to use a version control system for our upcoming master theses (Latex document and various programming). I'm not talking about anything huge and complicated here, just to use it for backup, looking at old revisions and some basic branching and merging. However, I think it's a good idea to choose one that's somewhat easy to learn for a beginner. So the question is, which version control system would you recommend to someone that's new to such things to learn? Personally I've been using Git and Mercurial a bit and at the moment I

Someone committed all binaries to our bazaar trunk, and I want to get rid of it. `bzr del file' only deletes the file from the current revision, but not the history of the file. Is there a way we can remove the file history so that we don't all have to download hundreds of MBs of data? There is 2 ways. But you need to be ready that you will re-create the part (or even full) of your branch history, so your current (local) branches will become incompatible with new branch after deleting the file. 1) Manual way. You can create a copy of your branch to revision just before big files have added.

I'd like to convert a repository from Subversion to Mercurial, but when I initially set up the repository, I did it in the laziest way possible. Over time, the structure continued to morph and deteriorate (it's 5 years old at this point). Nevertheless, I'd like to preserve as much history as possible, even if I have to get dirty and manually stitch things back together. Without further ado, the current structure looks like so: svn://svn.example.com/Example + trunk + BigProject + BinaryDepedencies + branches + BigProject + branch1 + feature1 + maintenance1 + ... + tags + BigProject + tag1 +

Suppose I have a project in source control with a lot of subdirectories, many of which I don't need at the moment. I would like to create a working copy containing only some of the entire tree, which still maintaining the ability to make changes, commit them, and push them back up. Is this possible and if so, how can I do it? I'm still deciding whether to go with bazaar or mercurial, so answers regarding either of those would be helpful. Edit: Actually, solutions for git would be useful too. Steve Losh If you already have a repository and you'd like to do this, it's going to be a pain. If you

I tired my hands on bazaar(launchpad), for the reason that i can host my project at launchpad, and bazaar (my local machine) would be tightly integrated with launchpad. I have posted my question at launchpad forum, and have not got any answer. Anyways... So i was thinking about shifting it from there to some other site. I dont know why, but couple of friends said sourceforge has not remain that good, but i still see too many project linking to sourceforge. PS recommendation. Is there a place where you guys upload your personal projects, and also SVN I think is the most popular, but with git

Possible Duplicates: Why is git better than Subversion? I've already read a lot (not enough to get the perfect picture though) about versioning systems, and the obvious conclusion is that GIT is simply the best. Or Bazaar maybe. Or Mercurial. But if so it was, then nobody would be using SVN, but they still do. Why? I myself have no own opinion on what v.c.s. is generally the best yet because of lack of experience with them. Could you share your thoughts? Zed I'm currently maintaining a version control service for a U.S. research institution. We're not only supporting SVN in addition to Git and