[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Monotone-devel] Status of blue sky ideas?

From: CooSoft Support
Subject: Re: [Monotone-devel] Status of blue sky ideas?
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 20:42:24 +0000
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20101027)

Bruce Stephens wrote:
CooSoft Support <address@hidden> writes:


Git is far too complex in certain areas and it's easy to loose

Too complex?  In some sense, yes.  The set of commands is rather random,
not consistent (it's obvious that much of it grew rather than being
designed).  I disagree that it's easy to lose things: it's easy to throw
things away, but once you've committed something it's difficult to lose
it (unless you remove .git, which I guess isn't impossible coming from
monotone where the database is outside your checkout).
I was thinking about divergences from non-head revisions, in mtn you just get two heads on the same branch. In git it goes off branch and the only way you can get back to it is to remember the sha1 hash on the revision. If it isn't put on a branch then it gets pruned when you do a git gc.. Other things are also more clunky.

Perhaps more plugging of mtn on the internet?.... To get the git

Make sure you've got something to offer.  Back in the day there weren't
many practical DVCSs, but nowadays I'd guess that fossil would be a more
likely refuge for people who don't like git or mercurial.  (Not sure who
bazaar attracts; I find it peculiarly opaque.)

hehe - a lot of people do not get on with git, goodness knows how many do. mtn is very good at the day to day stuff, branching merging etc and the merging on git can make a real mess - I know I have had to sort it out (and yes mtn under the same conditions did it perfectly).

The only reason I don't recommend mtn in all situations is for MS-Windows users that are used to desktop integration. Perhaps that is an area to concentrate on,

Monotone-devel mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]