From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: preferring mercurial Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:44:56 +0900 Message-ID: <8761psf1kn.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <3905544.suqMZffgM5@descartes> <874n5d6whz.fsf@gaia.iap.fr> <87iottf4fe.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87txdc5fhl.fsf@gaia.iap.fr> <8761pskqg6.fsf@nbtrap.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1389357979 27518 80.91.229.3 (10 Jan 2014 12:46:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:46:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=BCdiger?= Sonderfeld , Neal Becker , =?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois?= Orieux , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Nathan Trapuzzano Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 10 13:46:23 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 1W1bTi-0003iC-JG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 13:46:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56635 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1bTi-00073R-6n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 07:46:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53369) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1bTY-0006vN-3s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 07:46:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1bTS-0001kV-8B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 07:46:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.224]:38601) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1W1bTR-0001Kr-Ut for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 07:46:06 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt2.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9ED79708E0; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:44:56 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A29561A2E82; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:44:56 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <8761pskqg6.fsf@nbtrap.com> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 2a0f42961ed4 XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.224 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:168001 Archived-At: Nathan Trapuzzano writes: > "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 Except that this blog fails to mention bookmarks and the rev query language, like I did earlier in this thread. The combination of those two changes the game quite a bit I suspect. I still like git's open data structures compared to Mercurial's revlogs (for example, it's not obvious what happens if you rollback a bookmarked commit), but once you have proper refs and a query language, it should be possible to do most of the things git does as git does them.