When comparing Bazaar vs Fossil, the Slant community recommends Fossil for most people. In the question“What are the best version control systems?” Fossil is ranked 3rd while Bazaar is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose Fossil is:
Fossil includes source code management, bug tracking, a wiki, and technotes. It even includes its own web server, though it can fairly easily be incorporated into other webservers.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Tracking empty folders
With Bazaar you can track empty folders without the need to put .keep files in them.
It is quick to learn, you don't need to memorize lot of commands to do your job.
Pro Full support for renaming
Renaming of a file is fully supported, not a hack like removing a file and adding back under another name...
Pro Very complete
Fossil includes source code management, bug tracking, a wiki, and technotes.
It even includes its own web server, though it can fairly easily be incorporated into other webservers.
A Fossil repository is contained in a single file.
Fossil can run on Linux, Mac, BSD derivatives and on Windows.
Pro Very easy to configure as self-hosted.
Single, stand-alone executable, including web server.
Pro Needs very few server resources
Since Fossil is a distributed VCS on top of being a bug tracker, it needs very few server resources.
Con Slow developement
Bazaar tends to have a slow update cycle with Canonical. Version 2.6 was released in August 2013 and branch 2.7 was not finished until Feb. 2016.
Con Complicated requirements
Con Only a web interface or CLI
Fossil's bug tracker only works with the web interface or the command-line interface. There's no native GUI client supporting it.
There are some independent GUI clients out there, but none of them support Fossil's full range of abilities.