Comments on: Revisiting Git and Mercurial

By: Мысли вслух: Git или Mercurial » Outsourcing stories

Мысли вслух: Git или Mercurial » Outsourcing stories — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:26:38 +0000

[...] Revisiting Git and Mercurial [...]

By: The Changelog

The Changelog — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 23:25:16 +0000

I’ve been writing about Git a bit lately.

I’ve decided to switch some of my Debian work over to it to start with, as well as some of my other projects.

Although I was thoroughly frustrated with Git a year ago, now I am quite pleased with it. What’

By: Frank Bauer

Frank Bauer — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:04:34 +0000

One really sweet feature git gained in the last year and which is probably not advertised much, is “git add -i”, which is interactive tool to add only some changes for commit ala “darcs record”.

By: John Goerzen

John Goerzen — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 22:03:00 +0000

Both git and Mercurial have read-write support for foreign branches in different formats. I think git’s is probably more advanced, though. From what I have seen from personal experience in Mercurial, and have read about Git, both are easy to use.

By: Andres Salomon

Andres Salomon — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 20:28:39 +0000

The git cheat sheet is incredibly useful for people who are new to git. It can be found here: http://zrusin.blogspot.com/2007/09/git-cheat-sheet.html

At OLPC (where we use git exclusively), it’s printed out and hanging on a wall in the main room.

By: pachi

pachi — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 18:43:18 +0000

Git’s windows support is really lacking. It runs on windows, but having to use a customized shell and terminal (msys) to be able to do anything useful is not exactly what one understands as a windows application. It’s only slightly better than using cygwin and, besides that, the mingw port isn’t fully integrated in the main branch…

By: alec

alec — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:44:34 +0000

“Bzr remains really uninteresting; I don’t see it offering anything compelling that Mercurial or Git can’t do.”

bzr has the concept of “foreign branches”; write a plugin to make it interoperate seamlessly with your revision control system of choice. For example, bzr-svn allows you to use bzr on a remote svn repository; unlike git-svn, there are no special, additional command, it “just works”. Read-only version for git and hg exist. With all the different systems around, that could be a killer feature.

By: desegnis

desegnis — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 13:02:31 +0000

Git’s capability in the analysis of data movement is really what makes it attractive for me (along with its performance). My major gripes, however, are the (really) messy sources, the bad (virtually non-existing) architecture documentation, the geeky terminology, and the somewhat unorganized interface. So much for my rant for today.

By: Ravi

Ravi — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 07:03:02 +0000

At my day job, we store all of our source in a central SVN repository, since that was the cool thing to do back in the day.

Personally, I’ve been on the lookout for a good distributed complement to our SVN since ICFP 2005 (when I saw Audrey Tang demonstrate svk). I’d already been burned by enough branch management and switching to understand the value. Unfortunately, svk turned out to be too buggy, inflexible and heavyweight for what I wanted. When I ended up going off and working on a complicated personal branch, svk was better than nothing, but it didn’t always work right and it was too much work to use for smaller bits of local development.

Recently, I ended up trying git (and, most importantly git-svn) and it seems to be everything I want. The svn integration is top-notch (which surprised me because I thought svk would do the best there since it is built on SVN). Pushing and pulling from our central SVN is as seamless as I could want. “git svn rebase” and “git svn dcommit” let me reconcile my local, incremental changes with the central linear history, without making mistakes (which was the worst part of using svk – if a merge conflict wasn’t resolved just right pushing back to the repository might create trash).

git is still slower than I’d like sometimes (I think I’m using the wrong commands for some operations) and I’m not yet happy with the options for managing multiple git repositories (I’d like to move code back and forth between my laptop and one of our fast servers and I just haven’t gotten that to work right), but it is still a big step forward from what I had before.

As a Haskell programmer, I feel a little guilty I’m not using darcs, but, for the moment, git-svn is what works for me.