This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sourceware.org
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Re: Tracking eCos as a hg/git submodule
Sergei Organov wrote:
> Alex Schuilenburg <alexs@ecoscentric.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>
>> I agree. No sooner than I mention that you can refer locally to a
>> changesets by an alias (shorter id) instead of the SHA3 key, while git
>> AFAIK requires the full key, will somone in git-land go ahead and
>> implement it. Or maybe they already have? ;-)
>>
>
> No, they believe git doesn't need them and I tend to agree. Not only you
> can use just first few digits of SHA to reference a revision in git, but
> also git has nice syntax to refer to revisions back in history
> relatively, i.e., HEAD~3 means 3 revisions back from HEAD (for those who
> doesn't know git, HEAD is the symbolic name for the commit your current
> working tree is based on).
>
hg equivalent to HEAD is tip, and I just discovered that hg also accepts
the first few digits of SHA. Go figure... Learn something new everyday...
>
>> There is so much feeding off ideas between the two camps I don't think
>> so. Nothing stands out as a definitive deal-breaking feature-grabbing
>> feature. IMHO we are really just talking about two variants of the
>> same class of car.
>>
>
> Hg insists on recording copies and renames at commit time, while git
> detects copies and renames at the time of execution of particular
> operation that needs this information. And yes, both have their pros and
> cons.
>
> From the user point of view it means that in hg you must remember to use
> "hg rename" and "hg copy" when appropriate (and blame yourself should
> you forget to do it), while in git you are free from this duty (now tell
> me which one is easier to use ;))
>
Depends whether you trust gits ability to detect renames and copies. I
also prefer knowing what my DRCS is going to do by telling it, rather
than it guessing and doing it, so I am not a fan of the "hg
guessrenames" extension written to match git's behaviour you describe
above, so I choose not to install/enable it. So I say hg is easier,
because I can choose whether I want this this behaviour ;-P Oh, wait,
git...
I am going to stop now with the feature bashing because I dont think we
are getting anywhere, other than proving exactly how similar git's and
hg's features are. I have a bugzilla upgrade to get on with.
-- Alex Schuilenburg
Managing Director/CEO eCosCentric Limited
www.ecoscentric.com
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss