On 9/17/2015 3:09 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
On 17/09/2015 02:59, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 9/16/2015 5:20 AM, Oleg Broytman wrote:
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 07:44:28PM +0000, Augie Fackler
<r...@durin42.com> wrote:
There are a lot of reasons to prefer one tool over another. Common
ones are
familiarity, simplicity, and power.
Add here documentation, speed, availability of extensions and
3rd-party tools, hosting options (both locally installable and web
services).
For me, the killer 3rd party tool in favor of hg is TortoiseHg, which I
use on Windows. As far as I know (I did check a bit), there is no
equivalent for git on Windows. For me, the evaluation should be between
hg+TortoiseHG versus git+???.
TortoiseHG includes the Workbench program, which to me is the superstar
of the package and what I use daily for everything except a batch
program to pull and update the multiple repositories (currently 3.6 and
3.5, 3.4, and 2.7 shares). Screenshot here
https://tortoisehg.readthedocs.org/en/latest/workbench.html
The main dag + (changeset + working directory) pane can have a tab for
each branch repository. A sub-pane for the selected changeset or working
directory lists the files changed. A sub-sub-pane shows a diff for the
selected file. So it is easy to check that all branch repositories are
ready for a commit+merge. Once ready, committing to 2.7 and 3.4, merging
to 3.5 and 3.6, and pushing takes less than a minute, thereby minimizing
the change of losing a push race.
There certainly is (and with the obvious name!):
https://tortoisegit.org/
This works off of right-click context menus, as tortoisesvn did and
tortoisehg can, but I looked at the screenshots and there is no
workbench program. So, for me, not equivalent at all.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
