On Aug 24, 2010, at 11:29 AM, mart wrote: > Well, this is all interesting :) After reading Michele's email, I just > had to spend hours looking at Mercurial (& the like) as deeply as the > day would let me (I'm on PTO, so I can do this). I thought I had a > good idea about "distributed" version control system but, as it turns > out, a few surprises were there waiting for me. I have always been a > believer in "development against the known reference version" (now, > that's me being old fashioned). So, yes... Mercurial must be a painful > thing. Based on what I have read, mercurial seems a little too > chaotic for my taste. I do believe there is one way to manage a source > repository (did I really just say that?) wrt to input/output. Well, > honestly, I am way too big of a "exactly what is going to any of the > products I build" junky, to even accept some of the basic premises of > Mercurial. Like any workingDirectory is a potential branch?
The O'Reilly Hg book "Mercurial: The Definitive Guide" is a really good reference here, not just for day-to-day help, but for real insight into the advantages and strategies of distributed version control. Highly recommended.
