[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mercurial vs. git

From: Arne Babenhauserheide
Subject: Re: Mercurial vs. git
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 10:47:26 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.12.3 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.3.3; x86_64; ; )


Am Donnerstag, 5. November 2009 13:56:09 schrieb olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net:
> I can see though how Git can be problematic for people who try to learn
> it bit by bit...

> Must be talking past each other here... This is about *me* doing *my*
> work efficiently in *my* repository. How efficiently or inefficiently
> others deal with the stuff I publish, has little effect on my own
> efficiency.

But for me that question is central: I want others to be able to work with my 
stuff as easily as possible (and I also want to be able to go back and work on 
it after not having used the system for a few weeks/months - I often jump from 
personal project to personal project). 

> My opinion is that there is no "one size fits all" here.

My opinion is that there's quite a neat sweet spot between the two extremes - 
and that Mercurial quite nicely hits that sweet spot :) 

> Admittedly, this makes it a bit hard to find a good compromise in
> projects that involve both serious programming and non-programming
> content in the same repository...

Same in projects with both serious programmers and casual programmers. 

But anyway, it's now clear where our different opinion comes from - root cause 
found, I think :) 

And that's a very positive result, I'd say. 

The question "what's your target audience?" now more easily leads to a choice 
of VCS which we could both agree on. 

Best wishes, 

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 
   - singing a part of the history of free software -

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]