2 ms·

I spent a few weeks working with Git, taking full advantage of the cool history-rewriting stuff it can do that Mercurial still doesn't quite match. It worked, b

by TillE 12y ago

I spent a few weeks working with Git, taking full advantage of the cool history-rewriting stuff it can do that Mercurial still doesn't quite match. It worked, but it required the most arcane syntax I've ever seen. Then I gave up and went back to Mercurial. It does a much better job with subrepos, and I can actually use it without always consulting a hand-scrawled reference sheet for common tasks.

jordigh 12y ago
> that Mercurial still doesn't quite match Mercurial's history rewriting is excellent. Do you know of `hg histedit`, `hg commit --amend`, `hg rebase`, `hg crecord --amend`? If you're using Evolve, there's also `hg uncommit` and `hg amend`, amongst others: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OlDm3akbqg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OlDm3akbqg (Demo begins around 9:10)