From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Nathan Trapuzzano Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: preferring mercurial Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:48:41 -0500 Message-ID: <8761pskqg6.fsf@nbtrap.com> References: <3905544.suqMZffgM5@descartes> <874n5d6whz.fsf@gaia.iap.fr> <87iottf4fe.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87txdc5fhl.fsf@gaia.iap.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389354542 19464 80.91.229.3 (10 Jan 2014 11:49:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 11:49:02 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=BCdiger?= Sonderfeld , Neal Becker , "Stephen J. Turnbull" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois?= Orieux Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 10 12:49:09 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1W1aaI-0004aX-5Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:49:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56476 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1aaH-0004VG-QC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:49:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1aa8-0004TJ-MN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:49:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1aa3-0002Mq-6C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:48:56 -0500 Original-Received: from alt-proxy17.mail.unifiedlayer.com ([66.147.241.60]:42038) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1aa2-0002Mf-TK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 06:48:51 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 12581 invoked by uid 0); 10 Jan 2014 11:48:47 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO host393.hostmonster.com) (66.147.240.193) by oproxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 10 Jan 2014 11:48:47 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nbtrap.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=BhIkGuDhjVSYz+xWOoh32Vqof6IatQoqou5p6Mwaukw=; b=ewmfIL6fVlTKlDb+TFXmx2Pb7I0Il+0GOIgrur82qMd98/1FGjsap5b0UHrRZEJskjJs5RSRI+nw1uGqyjdHm4gPtqqvvIQq0Ts4s5swEaG5BehGkAJ7YoApglECGIZm; Original-Received: from [50.90.253.209] (port=38897 helo=Nathan-GNU) by host393.hostmonster.com with esmtpsa (UNKNOWN:CAMELLIA128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W1aZz-0001SC-3o; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 04:48:47 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87txdc5fhl.fsf@gaia.iap.fr> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Fran=C3=A7ois?= Orieux"'s message of "Fri, 10 Jan 2014 10:54:30 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-Identified-User: {1585:host393.hostmonster.com:nbtrapco:nbtrap.com} {sentby:smtp auth 50.90.253.209 authed with nbtrap@nbtrap.com} X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 66.147.241.60 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:167997 Archived-At: Fran=C3=A7ois Orieux writes: > But by taking into account all the pro and cons of both tools, we must > admit that the sole thing that really remains is that git is popular: > git is chosen because "everybody" chose this tool. Why not afterall. I still don't think that's right. Git and Mercurial have significantly different data models. Git's model is much simpler and allows complex actions to be defined in terms of a small number of very basic unifying concepts, whereas the same actions in Mercurial often require non-standard extensions. As I believe someone in this thread already put it: "Git got branches right, Mercurial (and Bazaar, etc.) didn't". This essay describes the difference well: http://xentac.net/2012/01/19/the-real-difference-between-git-and-mercurial.= html