[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: preferring mercurial

From: Tim Visher
Subject: Re: preferring mercurial
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 08:11:29 -0500

Hi Neal,

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 7:35 AM, Neal Becker <address@hidden> wrote:
> I don't understand the git momentum.  I've use hg heavily, and am generally
> happy with it.

At this point, as esr has said on multiple occasions, git's momentum
just is what it is. It one like Java did. It's probably time to just
make your peace with that.

> Every time I have to use git, I have a terrible time.  I find it vastly more
> complicated than hg.  The docs (in the form of man pages) I find never answer 
> my
> questions.  Each one seems to cover 100 different topics, variations and 
> corner
> cases.  Trying to read this requires a vast new vocabulary or arcane terms.

I've used git since pretty early on and so I don't have beginners mind
here but I'd say that if you were to give it time and loose some of
your assumptions, git's ui would start to make more sense to you. I
don't know if it's Stockholm Syndrome talking or not, but having used
it for a number of years almost exclusively it's ui and terminology
make perfect sense to me.

> hg also has tortoisehg, which is a very nice mature gui.  There is nothing 
> like
> that for git.  I have found 1 or 2 guis that are extremely limited in 
> function.

Sounds like you're on windows, then. Have you given tortoisegit or Git
Cheetah a shot? Back when I was into GUIs, I remember tortoisegit
being at least as nice as tortoisesvn (which I believe was the main
progenitor of the tortoise-x naming convention).



In Christ,

Timmy V.

http://five.sentenc.es/ -- Spend less time on mail

reply via email to

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