[petsc-dev] [mpich-discuss] MPICH migration to git

Sean Farley sean.michael.farley at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 22:46:18 CST 2013

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Sean Farley <sean.michael.farley at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I've found most of your bugs in the mercurial tracker. Almost all of
>> your use cases that you are referencing are solvable after the
>> introduction of evolving changesets. The key feature missing was the
>> ability to mark a changeset as 'killed' or 'invisible' or whatever you
>> want to call it. `hg strip` would really remove the changesets and
>> therefore the bookmark would no longer have anything to point to. Now
>> that changesets can be hidden, your gripes are moot. The bookmark will
>> stay there and can be restored easily.
>> This is a great example of comparing an old version / concept of
>> mercurial with git.
> I'm sorry I don't hang out on the hg development list. It's telling that
> we're still getting hung up on things that were stable more than five years
> ago in Git. Hg does get better (and more git-like) in each release.

Jed, you have to realize that you're the only one in this thread that
has been disgruntled with mercurial. Even that random dude that
commented still doesn't like git.

Yes, yes, git did this light-weight branching first. But, IMHO,
mercurial has done it in a cleaner way. And I'll take cleaner and
better thought out than quick and dirty any day.

More information about the petsc-dev mailing list