Is Subversion more "supported" by continuous integration tools than Mercurial?
continuous-integration, dvcs, mercurial, svn, version-control
Solution
Mercurial is already supported by any modern CI system you'd consider switching to. I use it with Hudson, but anything new-ish supports mercurial. Mercurial itself provides RSS feeds, no need to count on the CI system for those -- they're better and producing test pass/fail feeds and build/release feeds.
General subversion -> mercurial advice is all over the place, including 3 similar questions asked here just yesterday.
Problem
We are currently using NAnt on our build server, with CVS as our source control system. Seeing the need for improvements, we are investigating continuous integration tools and other source control systems. Subversion seems to be the most straightforward option to move on to from CVS, but a distributed version control system like Mercurial has so many advantages that it seems foolish to ignore them. So in contemplating which source control system to upgrade to, I am interested to hear about how well various continous integration tools support Mercurial (or other DVCS for that matter), and especially if there are any features that come "out of the box" for Subversion that may need some amount of tweaking before it will work with Mercurial. I am especially interested in an RSS feed of all commits to a selection of branches (or trunks or whatever is the appropriate name for the source control system in question). Have you perhaps migrated from Subversion to Mercurial? If so, what challenges did you encounter regarding your continuous integration server?