On Jan 9, 2013, at 10:32 PM, "C. Bergstr?m" <cbergstrom at pathscale.com> wrote:
> On 01/10/13 11:23 AM, Barry Smith wrote: >> On Jan 9, 2013, at 10:19 PM, Dmitry Karpeev<karpeev at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >> >>> My summary would be that >>> 1. Git's ui is bad >>> 2. There is the crappy index thingie >>> 3. I don't see how git branches are better than hg bookmarks (again, the >>> ui is bad). >>> 4. I still use multiple repos along with branches in git. >>> 5. I am willing to bet money Satish will use multiple repos, rather than >>> branches. >> Thanks. This is why I want to see Jed and Satish's mapping; I don't want >> to change to git and then have a gotcha of "but that was easy in hg but is a >> big fucking pain in git and I have to do it every day". > Everyone on this list should know this is a bikeshed discussion. Ah yes, but it is my bikeshed* and I don't want to be disgruntled :-) Barry * it is not really my bikeshed but everyone will be happier if I am not disgruntled, you don't want a disgruntled Barry > Someone should pick something - do the migration and announce it as done if > possible. Some people will be disgruntled for a while, workflows may change > a bit and eventually everything settles down. > --------------------- > +1 git > --------------------- > Why > github (project visibility, easy to fork, pull requests, features.. almost > all devs I know have github id and few have bitbucket) > More people are familiar with and using git than hg at this point > it's good enough > --------------------- > (I think git has an illogical crap way of doing some things. I never liked > and still don't like git, but I've adjusted.) > > /* Apologies for contributing to this bikeshed discussion */ > > ./C
