> - Binary diffs (svn is best was my impression) I am not sure how svn handles binaries. I believe bzr uses binary diff ( http://old.nabble.com/Re%3A-SVN-and-

> - Binary diffs (svn is best was my impression) I am not sure how svn handles binaries. I believe bzr uses binary diff ( http://old.nabble.com/Re%3A-SVN-and-graphics-binary-files-p27413075.html http://old.nabble.com/Re%3A-SVN-and-graphics-binary-files-p2... ) IIRC there is also a file locking plugin. > - Multi-platform (svn and hg do well ?) As you already mention (as PS), multi-platform support is good. I primarily use it on Windows and Linux. Haven't tried OSX but there is an installer. > - Hg seems to get the most non-git DVCS uptake. Are the bzr technical merits enough to justify the push by Canonical/Ubuntu ? I haven't use hg much so I can't comment on that but bzr does have better storage efficiency as mentioned at http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-bazaar.html http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-b... . Its closer to git in repo size. rename and directory versioning is first class (no need for .ignore files). Performance is comparable to hg. One reason I use bzr is its support for wide range of protocols including sftp, ftp. There are some good plugins like bzr-upload[1] that allow working with remote hosts. bzr-explorer[2] is also nice. Also, launchpad integration is really good. [1] https://launchpad.net/bzr-upload https://launchpad.net/bzr-upload [2] http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/explorer/en/ http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/explorer/en/