Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The answers to this question have convinced me I want to start using some kind of version control system. The question is, which should I use? First this is mainly just for myself, not for collaboration.

What are the pros and cons of git, SVN, mercurial... others?

I'd like to be able to have a version number in the header or footer of my drafts. Ideally, I'd like a system which allowed me to compile a document such that differences between selected versions of the file are highlighted in the pdf output somehow (a sort of "track changes" like behaviour). And I'd like to have nice integration with emacs, my editor of choice.

Pros and cons of one versioning system per answer please

(I've CWed this, but discuss whether I should undo that...)

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by vanden, Joseph Wright, Caramdir, Loop Space, David Z Aug 5 '10 at 19:55

Questions on TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange are expected to relate to TeX, LaTeX or related typesetting systems within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

2  
This question isn't really on topic, in my view. It also might induce a holy war, along the lines of "vi or emacs?" –  vanden Aug 5 '10 at 17:42
    
Way off topic, I think –  Joseph Wright Aug 5 '10 at 18:10
1  
I don't know. there are specific needs that tex/latex has, especially involving diffs and tracking changes. It might be interesting to hear what people's experiences are –  Suresh Aug 5 '10 at 18:12
3  
I'd say off topic as LaTeX behaves like any other source code and the usual pros/cons apply. However more specialized questions can be asked, like tex.stackexchange.com/questions/821/… and tex.stackexchange.com/questions/821/… –  Caramdir Aug 5 '10 at 18:16
    
Otherwise, Wikipedia has lots of information about the differences between the various VCSes. Generally: Pick something that has nice integration with the way you work (OS, editor, etc.) and ask around what people you know use. –  Caramdir Aug 5 '10 at 18:20

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Firstly, almost every common VCS is supported by an Emacs extension so that is not a key concern.

The only VCS that can output things to your drafts that I am aware of is SVN. To do this you have to install a couple of LaTeX packages, as described here: http://www.tug.org/pracjourn/2007-3/kalderon-svnmulti/ These allow you to put SVN version numbers and other details into your drafts. There is no real reason why this can't be done with other VCSs, but so far nobody has released any LaTeX packages for them.

I don't know of any LaTeX packages that allow you to track changes in the pdf itself, but they all allow you to do this for the .tex file via the various diff commands. Again, getting this in the pdf file would be a matter of writing LaTeX packages.

Aside from these issues, the main thing you need to decide is whether to use a centralized (e.g. CVS, SVN) or distributed (e.g. git, Mercurial) system. Distributed systems have a number of advantages and, as far as I can tell, no disadvantages for use with LaTeX. For one thing, you can use them without setting up a server to just work with single-author projects on your own machine. They also store the whole history of the project on your local machine so you always have access to it even if you are offline (one of my coauthors is very picky about this).

Personally, I use Mercurial rather than git for the following reasons:

  • Git is undoubtedly more powerful than Mercurial, but the extra functionality is mainly relevant to software developers and you are extremely unlikely to need it for a LaTeX document.
  • Mercurial has a better user interface in the sense that, unlike git, most commands do what you would expect them to do and you won't need to use lots of flags and command line options to get it to do what you want. (WARNING! The Git vs. Mercurial debate is an example of a holy war. This is the personal view of the author and you are free to disagree, but if you do disagree then it is probably because you have never worked with anyone who is not intimately familiar with a *nix command line.)
  • Mercurial has excellent documentation, especially Mercurial:The Definitive Guide, which is available for free online. I didn't find anything nearly as good for git.
  • Mercurial makes it easy to throw up a repository server on even the most backwards shared hosting provider that you can get for $5 a month. The standard ways of serving git repositories require persistent processes, which means you may have to pay more for hosting. Of course, this is moot if you run your own server or have in house IT staff to do it for you.

In summary, Mercurial will scare your collaborators who are only reluctantly agreeing to use a VCS in the first place a lot less than git would.

share|improve this answer
2  
Throw in bazaar to make the "holy war" more interesting! –  Caramdir Aug 5 '10 at 18:25

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.