[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Mercurial vs. git

From: Sergiu Ivanov
Subject: Re: Mercurial vs. git
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:30:23 +0300
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)


On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:37:57AM +0200, olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 04:18:29PM +0300, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:46:06AM +0200, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
> > > "hg rollback" can also be used to undo pulling from someone, since
> > > it just reverts the last change to the history.
> > 
> > Sounds great; I'm can't remember git-reset being able to do that, but
> > it might be my lack of knowledge.
> Of course it can:

I'd be really surprised if it couldn't :-)
>    git reset --hard ORIG_HEAD

Hm :-( I always forget to consider using ORIG_HEAD in reverting
something :-(
> There are other ways also, for example:
>    git reset @{1}

I think I've never seen this notation before :-) Thank you for new
information! :-)
> The great thing about git is that *everything* can be reverted (with the
> obvious exception of git-gc...) -- including a revert.
> I really think this is *the* most important feature of git. No matter
> how much you screw up, you can *always* go back -- you just need to know
> how. This means a great increase of power in practice, because knowing
> that you can always recover, you can go ahead an try all kinds of crazy
> or otherwise "risky" stuff, which you'd never attempt otherwise.

Yes, this is *very* great :-) I feel considerably better when I know I
can always go back.


reply via email to

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