Comparison between BitKeeper

Back to main page

SCM feature:	BitKeeper	Add to comparison: +CVS +AccuRev +Aegis +AllChange +Arch +Bazaar +ClearCase +CM+ +CMSynergy +Co-Op +Darcs +Git +LibreSource Synchronizer +Mercurial +Monotone +OpenCM +Perforce +PureCM +SourceAnywhere +Subversion +Superversion +Surround SCM +svk +Team Foundation Server +Vesta +Visual SourceSafe
Atomic Commits	Yes (but need to verify)
Files and Directories Moves or Renames	Yes. Renames are supported.
Intelligent Merging after Moves or Renames	Unknown. Probably Yes.
File and Directories Copies	Yes. Copies are supported.
Remote Repository Replication	Yes.
Propagating Changes to Parent Repositories	Yes.
Repository Permissions	FILL IN
Changesets' Support	Yes. Changesets are supported.
Tracking Line-wise File History	Yes. (bk annotate)
Ability to Work only on One Directory of the Repository	No. All changes are made repository-wide.
Tracking Uncommited Changes	Yes. Using bk diff.
Per-File Commit Messages	Yes. It is possible to have a per-file commit message
Documentation	Very good. There is a comprehensive help at the BitKeeper site. Each command is documented in its own man page, and the client contains a help tool that offers an integrated help system.
Ease of Deployment	Good. All that is required is downloading a binary for the system and installing it using the installation script. The package is self-contained and is easy to set up.
Command Set	A CVS-like command set with some easy-to-get-used-to complications due to its different way of work and philosophy.
Networking Support	Good. Repositories can be checked out from remote over HTTP, and BitKeeper also sports its own proprietary protocol for communicating between one repository and the other.
Portability	Very good. Binaries are available for most common UNIX systems and for Windows 98 and above.
Web Interface	Yes. Its own built-in web-interface.
Availability of Graphical User-Interfaces.	Good. BitKeeper ships with several GUIs for performing common tasks. I'm not aware of any third-part GUIs.