[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Mercurial vs. git

From: Arne Babenhauserheide
Subject: Re: Mercurial vs. git
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:00:13 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; )

Am Mittwoch, 23. September 2009 14:26:30 schrieb Shakthi Kannan:
> Common! You didn't go through my presentation? :)
> http://shakthimaan.com/downloads/glv/presentations/di-git-ally-managing-lov
> e-letters.pdf

While that's a great idea for presenting version control, it clearly shows one 
of the problems of the git UI: 

I have to remember to use diff in 3 modes: 
git diff
git diff --cached
git diff HEAD


so, which one do I really need? 

I assume it's: 

git diff -> what changes *to tracked files* I didn't yet add
git diff --cached -> what added changes I didn't yet commit
git diff HEAD -> how my working repository differs from the latest commit. 

But that's essentially 3 different commands I need to keep in mind to see the 
state of my changes. 

In Mercurial that's far simpler, because it doesn't use an index as in between 
staging area: 

        "hg diff" shows you what will be committed when you use "hg commit". 

You can then tell it to compare other revisions, but the default usage is 
clear and simple. "hg help diff" will tell you the additional options :-) 

Best wishes, 

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 
Unpolitisch sein
hei├čt politisch sein, 
ohne es zu merken. 
- Arne (http://draketo.de)
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

reply via email to

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