Re: Fwd: Re: Revision control
Am Mittwoch 11 Juni 2008 03:56:06 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > That means, that the Mercurial people say, that history should be > > preserved in most cases, so it wasn't first priority. > > This is precisely the sort of policy decisions that the software should > not impose upon users. Git decided that usability wouldn't be first priority. Hg decided that changing history wouldn't be first priority. Neither decided, that one of them wouldn't ever be tackled. Having to learn and use non-intuitive commands isn't what software should impose on me. > In fact, changing history is useful in many many situations, and one of > the main reasons I consider git so powerful. Surely you will say now > that Linux perhaps needs to change history, but other projects don't... There are definitely times when you'll want to change history. I don't think it's something I need to do often, though, so having simple scripts which do it isn't a necessary feature for me. You can change history in Mercurial if you need to, but it isn't as quick as rebasing in git. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein Heißt politisch sein Ohne es zu merken. - Arne Babenhauserheide ( http://draketo.de ) -- Weblog: http://blog.draketo.de -- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of the history of free software. -- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) Regeln -- Mein öffentlicher Schlüssel (PGP/GnuPG): http://draketo.de/inhalt/ich/pubkey.txt signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Fwd: Re: Revision control
Hi, On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 01:39:51AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Am Samstag 07 Juni 2008 18:19:29 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > Err... Does that mean that Mercurial doesn't even offer rebase (and > > it can't be implemented trivially)?! > > That means, that the Mercurial people say, that history should be > preserved in most cases, so it wasn't first priority. This is precisely the sort of policy decisions that the software should not impose upon users. In fact, changing history is useful in many many situations, and one of the main reasons I consider git so powerful. Surely you will say now that Linux perhaps needs to change history, but other projects don't... :-P -antrik-
Re: Fwd: Re: Revision control
Am Samstag 07 Juni 2008 18:19:29 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > Err... Does that mean that Mercurial doesn't even offer rebase (and it > can't be implemented trivially)?! That means, that the Mercurial people say, that history should be preserved in most cases, so it wasn't first priority. It can be implemented, and the Summer of Code project is on the way to do just that. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein Heißt politisch sein Ohne es zu merken. - Arne Babenhauserheide ( http://draketo.de ) -- Weblog: http://blog.draketo.de -- Infinite Hands: http://infinite-hands.draketo.de - singing a part of the history of free software. -- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-) Regeln -- Mein öffentlicher Schlüssel (PGP/GnuPG): http://draketo.de/inhalt/ich/pubkey.txt signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Fwd: Re: Revision control
Hi, On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 10:38:53AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > I'm interested in how they are going to tackle that in the Summer of > Code project. > > I didn't find information about the way they want to do it in the > short description (and I don't have the time to investigate right now, > so I'll wait until the rebase plugin is finished (or at least > developed and documented far enough) to see if it meets these needs. Err... Does that mean that Mercurial doesn't even offer rebase (and it can't be implemented trivially)?! If so, that's q.e.d. for my claim that it doen't even come close in power. -antrik-
