On Jan 5, 2008 8:15 PM, Fernando Perez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 5, 2008 12:08 PM, David M. Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 4, 2008, at 13:58 , Fernando Perez wrote: > > > > > My vote so far is for hg, for performance reasons but also partly > > > because sage and sympy already use it, two projects I'm likely to > > > interact a lot with and that are squarely in line with the > > > ipython/numpy/scipy/matplotlib world. Since they went first and made > > > the choice, I'm happy to let that be a factor in my decision. I'd > > > rather use a tool that others in the same community are also using, > > > especially when the choice is a sound one on technical merit alone. > > > > > > Just my 1e-2... > > > > > > +1 on mercurial. It's what I use these days (previously, I used darcs, > > which I still like for its patch-handling semantics, but its > > dependence on Haskell, and the dreaded exponential-time merge are a > > bit of a pain). > > Regarding the 'record' capapbilities of darcs which were indeed very > nice, here's something that was recently mentioned on the sage list: > > """ > I noticed that Mercurial 0.9.5 has a "record" extension that mimics the > darcs record functionality of interactively asking what changes you want > to commit out of a file. I know there was discussion of this a while ago. > > Reference: > > http://www.selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial/2007-October/015150.html > under the New extensions heading. See also > http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/RecordExtension > > Anyways, I'm just posting this as an FYI. It might be nice to expose > this functionality to sage, if we haven't already. > > Thanks, > > Jason > """
Kirill (a sympy developer) has also sent patches for qrecord (record for mercurial queues) http://www.selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/2007-December/003953.html Ondrej _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion