On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 06:41:42PM -0700, Bill Shannon wrote: > >>I think of hg commit as equivalent to sccs delget. > > > > > >You need to significantly revise this thought :) > > Why?
Because they're completely non-equivalent. :) sccs delget adds one delta to one file. hg commit commits a changeset to a whole series of files. if anything, hg commit is more akin to a putback. > >>I'm not so much trying to argue about which is "right" or "wrong". > >>I'm mostly pointing out that this is different, and to better support > >>our people and our processes it would be good if there were fewer > >>differences. > > > > > >Certainly. A number of these differences, IMO, need to belong in 'wx', > >though, > >since they can be quite specific to the way we choose to do things rather > >than > >generally useful... others might make sense in hg itself, or mq, or an > >extension, etc. > > Remember that there are other Sun people using Teamware, who aren't > using the other Solaris customizations like wx. We need to help them > as well. And there are other non-Sun people (like the developers of Mercurial) who are using and developing Mercurial who don't need the baggage of Teamware transition aids polluting their tool. If you are proposing a fork of Mercurial, then... well that's a whole different argument. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development _______________________________________________ tools-discuss mailing list tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
