Also possibly check out hg shelve, but if you should definitely check out mq extension if you haven't. It is designed for patches but is really a powerful tool. It should solve your problem of partial file commits. Not that it matters too much, if you are happy with git you are unlikely to change your mind (nor should you). Just know that there isn't much you can do in one that you can't do in the other.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:29 AM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde < [email protected]> wrote: > > > Le jeudi 14 novembre 2013 01:15:27 UTC+1, anatoly techtonik a écrit : > >> On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 4:53:56 PM UTC+3, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde >> wrote: >>> >>> The discussion on https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/spyderlib/ >>> 5tw2ZItlxUM remind me of http://code.google.com/p/ >>> spyderlib/issues/detail?id=816. >>> Google code clearly lacks functionalities compared to Bitbucket and >>> Github (the main one being pull requests, I think). In addition to this is >>> the eventuality to shift to git instead of mercurial. >>> >> >> Both GitHub and BitBucket has awful interface, which is confusing for new >> users, who may not be Github clients. I am speaking about wiki pages. Issue >> trackers are also very limited compared to Google Code. >> > > Well it's a matter of taste, I don't like google code interface at all. > Wiki pages is a minor inconvenient (if any) compared to the usability of > pull requests. > I had problems to write the first post here: on each new line if would > switch back to bold. Yay for the interface ;) > > From the tip of my head, here are the pros and cons I can find for each >>> service : >>> >>> >>> *Bitbucket/Mercurial*+ Uses mercurial and git. This allows to keep >>> mercurial as VCS. >>> + TortoiseHg >>> >> - less users >>> >> + simple >> + free private repositories >> > > True, but private repos is not a concern for spyder. > > >>> *Github/Git*- Git only >>> + numpy, scipy, ipython and matplotlib use it >>> + more users >>> - tracker data has a proprietary format (but is it important ?) >>> >> >> >>> There is also the possibility to have read/write mirror I guess, but I >>> have no clue of how it works... >>> >> >> Pull from Bitbucket, commit to Google Code, and it is synced around. No >> read/write mirror is possible without auto merges. >> >> >>> Why I prefer Git over Mercurial : >>> + 2-stage commits helps to check the correctness of commits >>> >> >> 2-stage commits really suxx. Use `hg record` if you're unsure about what >> you're committing. >> > > It sux for you maybe, but it is very logical to me to first choose the > modifications you want to commit, then validate the commit. It fits my > workflow very well. Thanks for `hg record`, it seems to be a direct > equivalent. > > >> + easy selection line by line or block by block instead of whole files >>> for commits (using git gui) >>> >> >> 'hg record', no GUI required. >> > > GUI is not required, it just makes it easier. I usually prefer a good gui > to any command line. (Sadly good gui is not that common.) > > >> + git stash >>> >> >> Mercurial queues or "hg diff > stash" >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "spyder" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "spyder" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
