26

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, alexzzzz, you wrote: A> Whether because in Studio and so many superfluous pens and buttons, and in the client all that concerns control of versions it is separated from Studio and it is collected in one place. Whether because TortoiseHg such convenient - tried other clients (SourceTree and SmartGit/Hg), but somehow did not go. And I all this time wrote the code to studios, twisting pens and pushing buttons, and was not soared with clients. It is convenient to me to do all of studio, differently the sensation of control over a situation disappears.

27

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> did not see in this article why there are no reasons to use SVN. Are offered doubtful (for me, anyway) advantages at the expense of complexity magnification. With branches worked? Generally after branch merge it was reverse in SVN from stories not so how much I remember. Therefore I in due time not  reversely branch, and rolled a patch from a branch on the master and so flooded.

28

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Ejnstok Fajr, you wrote: > Well clearly it is visible that at it any perspectives: If eyes at you somewhere near * the idiot here is faster you.  is a thing which projected. Git is  Trolvadsa for simplification to itself operations, from here and such obscene quality and .

29

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

The unique reason occurring, this presence TourtoiseHG Workbench. Excellent , would like such to . To all who has at itself the convenient console (, , it is probable wsl), and with it "you" is not so it is critical. Me personally enrages HG,  it is more convenient

30

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, alexzzzz, you wrote: And why not VisualHG which combines these two conveniences? https://github.com/geoffappleford/Visua … ag/3.0.1.2

31

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: ARK> did not see in this article why there are no reasons to use SVN. Are offered doubtful (for me, anyway) advantages at the expense of complexity magnification. To me enough following reasons: 1. SVN does not work in an offline. The Internet, of course, is always and everywhere. But it has a mean habit to break then when its breakage is critical (for example, directly before important release). Instead of the Internet, so the server on which it is twisted SVN. 2.  (git and so forth) it is very easily torn ad-hoc. SVN demands at first to adjust the server, to get a repository, to adjust access rights... 3. At SVN there are no labels and

32

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, iZEN, you wrote: ZEN> Here, by the way, the textbook for passage with SVN on Mercurial: https://habrahabr.ru/post/108443/At  the most part of commands coincides with SVN' (to be exact, with CVS', which their general ancestor)

33

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, _NN _, you wrote: _NN> From minuses: MS GitHub Some hammered on it and support only Git, and therefore without knowledge to Git advanced people not to get to anywhere well or all to do exceptional from IDE. It is possible to work from  with  a repository by means of a special plug-in _NN> And Git works in huge projects much faster. Well I would not tell...

34

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Somescout, you wrote: S> Substantiations of necessity in places look strange, start 250 (in comparison with 10 at git) - can I somehow not so the monitoring system of versions I use, but it is normal at all does not hinder - git is launched for  and synchronization, and against duration of synchronization 250 not that what it is a lot of. Where they it launch it for 250. At me on the project of the average size hg status has time for 140 to fulfill completely...

35

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, _NN _, you wrote: _NN> And why not VisualHG which combines these two conveniences? Instead of I remember. Precisely I remember that I it saw and tried, and it outwardly like was more nice HgScc, but whether in it there was any inconvenience for me, whether there was no version under fresh Studio. In general, returned on usage of exterior client TortoiseHg and plug-in HgScc which it is simple in Studio costs, but I practically do not use its functional. It is necessary to try once again VisualHG.

36

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> It is possible to work from  with  a repository by means of a special plug-in And built in, at least, in TortoiseHg. I use this possibility, that  hands in curious to me repositories on GitHub. At cloning from GitHub to myself in Mercurial to the address of an initial repository I add in front "git +" and all works, including the big repositories of type Mono or CoreFX. With curiosity tried from new local Hg  test  in new empty Git on GitHub. In appearance  it is normal, but I do not know, how much this possibility can be used for normal operation. We admit, we together with a companion pushim/pulim in the general repository Git. Only it does it of the Git, and I from Hg. At us precisely breaks nothing and it will not be confused? Whether it is necessary to work out in advance any rules of operation that it was not confused?

37

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, alexzzzz, you wrote: A> It is admissible, we together with a companion pushim/pulim in the general repository Git. Only it does it of the Git, and I from Hg. At us precisely breaks nothing and it will not be confused? Whether it is necessary to work out in advance any rules of operation that it was not confused? I worked in not which command in quality  the expert some time in such mode, problems any did not arise. The only thing that I noted, at us repositories were on , and here if to work through https at some instant something broke, and became impossible  the changes. By operation through ssh ( is able and and so) such problems never arose. Well and the second problem, initiating clone  very slowly. Further all APPRX.

38

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> I worked in not which command in quality  the expert some time in such mode, problems any did not arise. I simply am afraid to arrange unintentional sabotage. How much I represent, the branch in Git - is the concrete link to her head (if that, excuse for terminology), and in Hg can be: - concrete branches (all  names of branches in which them did), - concrete links to heads (store bookmarks, bookmarks), - at a concrete branch can be how many  indeterminate goals with access to them on a hash, number, or a tag if such is (I I love this possibility). And Hg in general to spit, how you prefer , it digests all. It is unique, at  a new indeterminate head can notify that so to arrive ugly; but this warning to what does not oblige. At Git-repository cloning in Hg if I am not mistaken, Git-branches turn to Hg-bookmarks, as the most faithful. It is interesting, what happens if casually to try  from Hg in Git a new branch with a new name or a new indeterminate head in an existing concrete branch and not to assign it bookmarks/bookmarks? I hope that Hg does not allow it to make, but itself did not try.

39

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> 3. At SVN there are no labels and  In svn that is finite is not present but it here without problems much. Not the such can , as at the orthodox.

40

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, GarryIV, you wrote: Pzz>> 3. At SVN there are no labels and  GIV> In svn that is finite is not present but it here without problems much. Not the such can , as at the orthodox. In SVN there are no labels and . Authors SVN explain it to that at them such abrupt cloning of directories that labels and  are necessary to nobody. The users who have got used to more other monitoring systems of versions, listen to these explanations bewildered.

41

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz>>> 3. At SVN there are no labels and  GIV>> In svn that is finite is not present but it here without problems much. Not the such can , as at the orthodox. Pzz> in SVN there are no labels and . Authors SVN explain it to that at them such abrupt cloning of directories that labels and  are necessary to nobody. Well and I speak, not  there they.

42

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, Pzz, you wrote: Pzz> To me enough following reasons: Pzz> 1. SVN does not work in an offline. The Internet, of course, is always and everywhere. But it has a mean habit to break then when its breakage is critical (for example, directly before important release). Instead of the Internet, so the server on which it is twisted SVN. And what for operation in an offline is necessary? Well there is no Internet, and figs with it.  when appears. Pzz> 2.  (git and so forth) it is very easily torn ad-hoc. SVN demands at first to adjust the server, to get a repository, to adjust access rights... Well, as on me, a new repository to make not especially difficult. Actually, there generally especially also there is nothing. Pzz> 3. At SVN there are no labels and  There are also labels, and , truth personally I do not use neither that, nor another.

43

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: Pzz>> 1. SVN does not work in an offline. The Internet, of course, is always and everywhere. But it has a mean habit to break then when its breakage is critical (for example, directly before important release). Instead of the Internet, so the server on which it is twisted SVN. ARK> And what for operation in an offline is necessary? Well there is no Internet, and figs with it.  when appears. And to fix made and to have checkpoint for driving further. (And not to do it VCS 80th years in the form of button F5 on the directory.)

44

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, netch80, you wrote: Pzz>>> 1. SVN does not work in an offline. The Internet, of course, is always and everywhere. But it has a mean habit to break then when its breakage is critical (for example, directly before important release). Instead of the Internet, so the server on which it is twisted SVN. ARK>> And what for operation in an offline is necessary? Well there is no Internet, and figs with it.  when appears. N> and to fix made and to have checkpoint for driving further. N> (And not to do it VCS 80th years in the form of button F5 on the directory.) and what the terrible happens, if I fix made through two hours?

45

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, _NN _, you wrote: _NN> it is more difficult , I quite often heard from friends as beginners use Git th and spoil history, push - force without analysis. Like simple to forbid a swagger , though on all repository, though on specific branches. I at all do not represent, what for such functional can be necessary to someone.

46

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: Pzz>>>> 1. SVN does not work in an offline. The Internet, of course, is always and everywhere. But it has a mean habit to break then when its breakage is critical (for example, directly before important release). Instead of the Internet, so the server on which it is twisted SVN. ARK>>> And what for operation in an offline is necessary? Well there is no Internet, and figs with it.  when appears. N>> and to fix made and to have checkpoint for driving further. N>> (And not to do it VCS 80th years in the form of button F5 on the directory.) ARK> and what the terrible happens, if I fix made through two hours?  it not the button "to save the server", this atomic logical change of the code. For two hours it is possible to make 20 .

47

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, vsb, you wrote: ARK>> And what the terrible happens, if I fix made through two hours? vsb> Kommit it not the button "to save the server", this atomic logical change of the code. For two hours it is possible to make 20 . I see. Personally I such am not engaged and I do not see in it necessity.

48

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, vsb, you wrote: vsb> Hello, _NN _, you wrote: _NN>> it is more difficult , I quite often heard from friends as beginners use Git th and spoil history, push - force without analysis. vsb> like simple to forbid a swagger , though on all repository, though on specific branches. I at all do not represent, what for such functional can be necessary to someone. I in course. However tell where so do, normally nobody does. The same GitHub does not forbid.

49

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, AlexRK, you wrote: Pzz>>>> 1. SVN does not work in an offline. The Internet, of course, is always and everywhere. But it has a mean habit to break then when its breakage is critical (for example, directly before important release). Instead of the Internet, so the server on which it is twisted SVN. ARK>>> And what for operation in an offline is necessary? Well there is no Internet, and figs with it.  when appears. N>> and to fix made and to have checkpoint for driving further. N>> (And not to do it VCS 80th years in the form of button F5 on the directory.) ARK> And what the terrible happens, if I fix made through two hours? That in an hour you something will get change so that you will understand that all is delirium, and you will want to be rolled away to the fixed state... And it is not present, because you solved  only in two hours. And as a result you will dig in a heap of heterogeneous editings that it is necessary to save and that is not present, in what variant works and why... Also you will kill on it even three hours. Personally to time it is a pity to me on nonsense,  - business of pair seconds.

50

Re: Why ... People agitate for Mercurial?

Hello, netch80, you wrote: N> that in an hour you something will get change so that you will understand that all is delirium, and you will want to be rolled away to the fixed state... And it is not present, because you solved  only in two hours. Well, time five for all life at me such can and was. But generally it is awfully rare case. N> and as a result you will dig in a heap of heterogeneous editings that it is necessary to save and that is not present, in what variant works and why... Also you will kill on it even three hours. All five times it was simple Ctrl+Z for some seconds. N> personally to time it is a pity to me on nonsense,  - business of pair seconds. For a week from these two seconds runs two hours.