[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/net/ocamlnet
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 01:17:35PM -0400, gary%duzan.org@localhost wrote:
> =>> > (It seems obvious to me that git is the only reasonable choice
> =>> > these days, but perhaps that's not the common view here.)
> =>> I don't see that. AFAICT the typical reaction to it around here lately
> =>> is that its UI is unpardonably awful.
> => I agree with the critcism. But I've come to the conclusion for work
> => that the best approach overall is to use git and make people learn it
> => (to the point of having multiple all-day classes). We've used rebasing
> => and history rewriting, and I don't think we could have done taht with
> => other systems.
> => Point taken that there is not consensus or even close.
> Just to throw in my two cents, I've been using Mercurial (hg) on and
> off for a few years, with a reasonable amount of success. It is largely
> equivalent in functionality to git, the interface seems easier to use,
> and while it isn't as popular as git, there are still a number of large
> projects using it.
I have been using Mercurial fairly heavily for several years; it has a
couple rough edges and we'd probably need to write a couple extensions
before switching all of NetBSD over. It seems entirely preferable to
git, the major problems being (1) it requires Python and (2) nobody's
yet managed to do a repo conversion to it.
> I've even managed some success doing incremental
> conversions from CVS (though the CVS repo could use a bit of cleanup to
> make it seamless).
if you mean the NetBSD CVS repository please elaborate...
David A. Holland
Main Index |
Thread Index |