3 ms·
The more I read stuff like this, the more I wonder how many problems would just go away for so many people if they used Mercurial instead.
by hellofunk 10y ago
The more I read stuff like this, the more I wonder how many problems would just go away for so many people if they used Mercurial instead.
- qznc 10y agoHow would this problem go away with Mercurial?
- hellofunk 10y agoIt's much harder to shoot yourself in the foot with Mercurial. Which is why so many developers and companies prefer it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10228399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10228399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9465084 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9465084
- mbrock 10y agoCould you explain how this specific situation is better with Mercurial? In nearly every thread about Git I hear vague claims that other systems are much easier, but almost never any specific reason to think so.
- reitanqild 10y agoSeconded. And sorry for the brief comment but that would be very interesting.
- hackerboos 10y agoWhy is Mercurial better than git? It's my understanding that you can still rewrite history with Mercurial.
- pjmlp 10y agoMost of the Mercurial use cases fit better with the metal model that people coming from SVN and similar, are used to. It is only when one wants to do advance tricks that he/she needs to enter "Git-like" land.
- krupan 10y agoMercurial keeps track of whether you have pushed a commit or not, and if you have pushed it, it won't let you rewrite it without doing a manual override. This feature is called, phases.
- zedpm 10y agoYou get new problems with Mercurial, like almost every tool out there barfing when it encounters multiple heads in a repo. Don't have multiple heads in a repo, you say? Not a viable option if you want to use bookmarks as lightweight branches.