Mark Lodato wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 4:26 AM, Robert Bradshaw > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Oct 5, 2009, at 6:56 PM, Mark Lodato wrote: >> >>> [...] I much prefer git to hg. >>> >> Just out of complete curiosity, why the strong preference? (I like >> both for different reasons.) >> You didn't ask me, but I'll go anyway :-), because I've considered switching to git for my own work and would like to see if my opinions hold water.
I don't really know git that well. But I wind up in situations that irritate me a lot with hg all the time: - The need to sometimes use patch queues. From what I understand of git, such situations would be tackled as part of normal git workflow rather than having to switch to, essentially, a different version control system within a version control system. - When I figure out "oh, I need to do this first in a seperate patch", I have to make a new clone and shut down and open emacs again (lest I accidentally edit files in the wrong clone), and so on. With in-place branching I haven't really learned about hg branches though. I kind of consider clones and patch queues more than enough tools for the same job, without there being branches as well -- so many tools for creating a diff/patch seems like an indication that something's been designed wrong. With git, all of this seems to just be one nicely integrated system of patches. Only one system to learn (although with a higher learning curve for svn users). I'm sure that if I started reaelly using git I'd find things wrong with it though :-) Dag Sverre _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
