On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 1:00 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think hg works in a similar manner to git. At least Linus said so in that > old google talk ;) Yes, compared to svn, hg, git and bzr are quite similar in a way. I think the differences still matter, though. > But hg doesn't/didn't have the same superstructure built > on top of the basic repository idea. Yes, it means you can build a lot of things around git, which is very flexible. You have the repo tool to deal with many modules, gerrit for code review, etc... But this flexibility comes with a price at the UI level - price which has diminished a lot, but is still not zero. I think this cost is nearly 0 for simple workflows, but it looks like I am relatively alone on this :) I could see (but still not entirely convinced) that hg could be simpler but from the hg book, it seems that that's only because it hides or prevent some advanced things (what Teo Tso' means with git has more legs http://tytso.livejournal.com/29467.html). And it has some things similar to bzr which I personally dislike deeply (simple revision). But that's a personal preference which does not weight as much for numpy in general. I would really need to use hg on a daily basis to get a good idea, specially w.r.t branch handling - that takes time in any VCS. That's the only way - it took me time to appreciate git branches compared to bz's way. David _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
