3 ms·
From what I can see, Mercurial actually has more flexibility when it comes to branching: http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-mercurial/ ht
by alwillis 14y ago
From what I can see, Mercurial actually has more flexibility when it comes to branching: http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-mercurial/ http://stevelosh.com/blog/2009/08/a-guide-to-branching-in-me...
- Niten 14y agoMore options, certainly, but I find git to be much more painless in this regard. Mercurial doesn't have anything equivalent to git's convenient workflow for creating temporary, local throwaway branches, without changing to a new working directory.
- alwillis 14y agoYou mean like Mercurial bookmarks? Branching with bookmarks is very close to the way git usually handles branching. Mercurial bookmarks are like git refs: named pointers to changesets that move on commit.
- Niten 14y agoBut like I explained in detail above, using Mercurial bookmarks it is tedious to avoid pushing your throw-away branch to the main repository, and you can't simply delete the branch when you're done with it. Git is much superior in this regard.