Pretty good list. A few comments below on a couple of them (I switched from git to mercurial and then to fossil).
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 5:35 AM, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote: > (3) Fossil gives you a "timeline" to help track your project. If Mercurial > does this, I've never seen it. Mercurial does have a pretty decent (and customizable) timeline functionality: http://hgbook.red-bean.com/read/customizing-the-output-of-mercurial.html I remember writing templates to make the output look like git (ha!), back before I found fossil. The git-style history diff summaries are pretty neat looking. > (6) A single fossil repository can host multiple checkouts at the same time. This is also doable with mercurial (just check out to a new folder), unless I'm confused about what you mean. > (9) Fossil versions branch names so that all contributors have a consistent > view of the project. (Git does not do this. I'm not sure how Hg works in > this regard - perhap a reader can brief me.) Branch names are versioned in mercurial. You assign a name and then commit it. http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/NamedBranches > (12) Fossil has auto-sync mode, which helps to keep all collaborators > working on the same code rather than diverging off into their on forks. This is one of the features that keeps me coming back. Why mercurial and git don't have this option is beyond me. For small especially, but even for fairly large projects, this is the greatest way to keep everyone together without needing excessive merging. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
