As a side, yet related, note, has any of you looked into the Atlassian suite (http://www.atlassian.com/)?  We purchased it for work about a year ago and have been very pleased. They have a free license for open source projects (http://www.atlassian.com/opensource/).

Just an idea to be filed away under "options".

@Ed It's been upgraded to the latest version of Trac.  GUI-wise, this doesn't change much.  I actually quite like trac's GUI, and the other point you brought up are a matter of core team / community involvement, which as I hope is clear we're improving.

What I'm going to do in the not-too-distant future is set up mirroring SVN to github to let people unsure about git have a try...

As it wassaid before - main problem and task isn't technological issude, but methodological. Without appropriatechanging of development model (if it's needed) changing only SCM will do less than nothing:

1. Branch merging works nice in SVN, if developer don't forget mantra "Merge ofteb, merge fast"

2. Chaos of partially-finished brances in any DCVS give us all one more headache - "Where is the best branch for me?"

3. As mentioned also - why even don't see at Mercurial (well-designed, smartly-implemented), which I see as a better choice in DCVS world vs Git (which was born as a mix of "home-made code" Perl+shell+...)

DCVS in coomon plays welll in situation of

1. a lot of developers,

2. which implements unrelated and independent changes

10-15 authors (with community-commiters) isn't a big problem for well-organized work with "classic" VCS

As a side, yet related, note, has any of you looked into the Atlassian suite (http://www.atlassian.com/)?  We purchased it for work about a year ago and have been very pleased. They have a free license for open source projects (http://www.atlassian.com/opensource/).

Just an idea to be filed away under "options".

@Ed It's been upgraded to the latest version of Trac.  GUI-wise, this doesn't change much.  I actually quite like trac's GUI, and the other point you brought up are a matter of core team / community involvement, which as I hope is clear we're improving.

What I'm going to do in the not-too-distant future is set up mirroring SVN to github to let people unsure about git have a try...

As it wassaid before - main problem and task isn't technological issude, but methodological. Without appropriatechanging of development model (if it's needed) changing only SCM will do less than nothing:

1. Branch merging works nice in SVN, if developer don't forget mantra "Merge ofteb, merge fast"

2. Chaos of partially-finished brances in any DCVS give us all one more headache - "Where is the best branch for me?"

3. As mentioned also - why even don't see at Mercurial (well-designed, smartly-implemented), which I see as a better choice in DCVS world vs Git (which was born as a mix of "home-made code" Perl+shell+...)

DCVS in coomon plays welll in situation of

1. a lot of developers,

2. which implements unrelated and independent changes

10-15 authors (with community-commiters) isn't a big problem for well-organized work with "classic" VCS

As a side, yet related, note, has any of you looked into the Atlassian suite (http://www.atlassian.com/)?  We purchased it for work about a year ago and have been very pleased. They have a free license for open source projects (http://www.atlassian.com/opensource/).

Just an idea to be filed away under "options".

@Ed It's been upgraded to the latest version of Trac.  GUI-wise, this doesn't change much.  I actually quite like trac's GUI, and the other point you brought up are a matter of core team / community involvement, which as I hope is clear we're improving.

What I'm going to do in the not-too-distant future is set up mirroring SVN to github to let people unsure about git have a try...

As it wassaid before - main problem and task isn't technological issude, but methodological. Without appropriatechanging of development model (if it's needed) changing only SCM will do less than nothing:

1. Branch merging works nice in SVN, if developer don't forget mantra "Merge ofteb, merge fast"

2. Chaos of partially-finished brances in any DCVS give us all one more headache - "Where is the best branch for me?"

3. As mentioned also - why even don't see at Mercurial (well-designed, smartly-implemented), which I see as a better choice in DCVS world vs Git (which was born as a mix of "home-made code" Perl+shell+...)

DCVS in coomon plays welll in situation of

1. a lot of developers,

2. which implements unrelated and independent changes

10-15 authors (with community-commiters) isn't a big problem for well-organized work with "classic" VCS

As a side, yet related, note, has any of you looked into the Atlassian suite (http://www.atlassian.com/)?  We purchased it for work about a year ago and have been very pleased. They have a free license for open source projects (http://www.atlassian.com/opensource/).

Just an idea to be filed away under "options".

@Ed It's been upgraded to the latest version of Trac.  GUI-wise, this doesn't change much.  I actually quite like trac's GUI, and the other point you brought up are a matter of core team / community involvement, which as I hope is clear we're improving.

What I'm going to do in the not-too-distant future is set up mirroring SVN to github to let people unsure about git have a try...

As it wassaid before - main problem and task isn't technological issude, but methodological. Without appropriatechanging of development model (if it's needed) changing only SCM will do less than nothing:

1. Branch merging works nice in SVN, if developer don't forget mantra "Merge ofteb, merge fast"

2. Chaos of partially-finished brances in any DCVS give us all one more headache - "Where is the best branch for me?"

3. As mentioned also - why even don't see at Mercurial (well-designed, smartly-implemented), which I see as a better choice in DCVS world vs Git (which was born as a mix of "home-made code" Perl+shell+...)

DCVS in coomon plays welll in situation of

1. a lot of developers,

2. which implements unrelated and independent changes

10-15 authors (with community-commiters) isn't a big problem for well-organized work with "classic" VCS

As a side, yet related, note, has any of you looked into the Atlassian suite (http://www.atlassian.com/)?  We purchased it for work about a year ago and have been very pleased. They have a free license for open source projects (http://www.atlassian.com/opensource/).

Just an idea to be filed away under "options".

@Ed It's been upgraded to the latest version of Trac.  GUI-wise, this doesn't change much.  I actually quite like trac's GUI, and the other point you brought up are a matter of core team / community involvement, which as I hope is clear we're improving.

What I'm going to do in the not-too-distant future is set up mirroring SVN to github to let people unsure about git have a try...

As it wassaid before - main problem and task isn't technological issude, but methodological. Without appropriatechanging of development model (if it's needed) changing only SCM will do less than nothing:

1. Branch merging works nice in SVN, if developer don't forget mantra "Merge ofteb, merge fast"

2. Chaos of partially-finished brances in any DCVS give us all one more headache - "Where is the best branch for me?"

3. As mentioned also - why even don't see at Mercurial (well-designed, smartly-implemented), which I see as a better choice in DCVS world vs Git (which was born as a mix of "home-made code" Perl+shell+...)

DCVS in coomon plays welll in situation of

1. a lot of developers,

2. which implements unrelated and independent changes

10-15 authors (with community-commiters) isn't a big problem for well-organized work with "classic" VCS

As a side, yet related, note, has any of you looked into the Atlassian suite (http://www.atlassian.com/)?  We purchased it for work about a year ago and have been very pleased. They have a free license for open source projects (http://www.atlassian.com/opensource/).

Just an idea to be filed away under "options".

@Ed It's been upgraded to the latest version of Trac.  GUI-wise, this doesn't change much.  I actually quite like trac's GUI, and the other point you brought up are a matter of core team / community involvement, which as I hope is clear we're improving.

What I'm going to do in the not-too-distant future is set up mirroring SVN to github to let people unsure about git have a try...

As it wassaid before - main problem and task isn't technological issude, but methodological. Without appropriatechanging of development model (if it's needed) changing only SCM will do less than nothing:

1. Branch merging works nice in SVN, if developer don't forget mantra "Merge ofteb, merge fast"

2. Chaos of partially-finished brances in any DCVS give us all one more headache - "Where is the best branch for me?"

3. As mentioned also - why even don't see at Mercurial (well-designed, smartly-implemented), which I see as a better choice in DCVS world vs Git (which was born as a mix of "home-made code" Perl+shell+...)

DCVS in coomon plays welll in situation of

1. a lot of developers,

2. which implements unrelated and independent changes

10-15 authors (with community-commiters) isn't a big problem for well-organized work with "classic" VCS