On Sun, Sep 30, 2007 at 03:50:34AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote: > > > While I do not make use of all the features of Mercurial, I've found > > it to be quite nice when for doing SAGE development. I currently have > > three different branches that I'm doing development on for features > > which independent of each other. Within each branch, I can make > > commits, revert them etc. When I have something to submit, it's easy > > to make a hg bundle / patch against the main branch for William to > > apply. > > Thanks Mike for the information. It seems to me that if we move from > svn, we should choose either git or mercurial. Mercurial seems to be a > little more documented and easier to switch to from svn. Also it > should work on windows. So I myself am inclined to mercurial. The only > problem is that we will have to host the repository somewhere else (I > know hg it is decentralized but still I think there should be some > official repository). > > Anyway, I myself am fine with svn, but if others want to change it, no > problem with that. I'll try to play with Mercurial to see how I like > it.
When playing with mercurial, I suggest to have a closer look at merqurial-queues http://hgbook.red-bean.com/hgbookch12.html http://hgbook.red-bean.com/hgbookch13.html and record http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/RecordExtension extensions -- Всего хорошего, Кирилл. http://landau.phys.spbu.ru/~kirr/aiv/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
