We've switched over to Mercurial as our revisioning / repository software. After about a month of using it I can say that it is far superior to subversion for how we develop our work. The most important part is that there isn't centralization, so you can clone from or merge to any repository anywhere. So you'll have the local repo on your own PC where you do your own work, then you `hg push` it up to your company sandbox and merge it with the other programmer's work. Then, finally, you just telnet in to your client and `hg pull`. Waaay easier and cleaner than subversion. There is absolutely no fuss. Anyone else using it yet?
Great timing I've been a long time user of Subversion, though with a new project I'm working on I was considering making the move to decentralisation... I was thinking of trying Bazaar. Out of curiosity, did you compare Bazaar to Mercurial at all? Was there anything in particular that made you choose Hg over the other options?
I haven't tried Bazaar or Git yet. I had planned on trying the former after giving Mercurial a test, but I was so impressed that I just stuck with it. =) What eventually made me move were the reports from the Mozilla team and why they chose to go to Mercurial. http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/preed/2007/04/version_control_system_shootou_1.html