> [Mercurial]...includes no unnecessary concepts/models (read: git's index) As someone who stubbornly uses mercurial for all his code, git's index is the singl

> [Mercurial]...includes no unnecessary concepts/models (read: git's index) As someone who stubbornly uses mercurial for all his code, git's index is the single greatest feature that git has over mercurial (not counting the Magit interface). The index allows me to _incrementally_ build up a commit. I can go back and fix things, add and remove things from the index, and only when I'm ready, commit. In mercurial, I have to hold so much more state in my head about what is ready to commit, what needs to be fixed, and what is code that needs to be reverted. And `hg commit -i` is nice, but is not a replacement for the index. Git's index allows me to add hunks, then stop, go to lunch, review the status, remove some bits, add more, then commit. I'm told that Mercurial's queues feature would support this, but I find it incredibly non-ergonomic, and I can't quite figure out how to use it as an index replacement.