[ECOS] Replacing CVS - decision time: part 2

[Bjørn Forsman]

Hi,

On 28 April 2010 15:55, Jonathan Larmour <jifl@jifvik.org> wrote:

[snip]

> - To serve on hg, it's just hg serve.

git has 'git instaweb' which is equivalent to 'hg serve'.
However, I think neither is meant for production use.

[snip]

> - While having 'git cherry' should be useful, showing only the sha1
> commit ids as output is a terrible UI choice - I suspect it reflects the
> desire of git to be a toolkit which can be munged by shell scripts. 'hg
> outgoing' is much better as it's more descriptive.

I use 'git log origin/master..' to see commits that are not in upstream.
Also, 'git status' indicates where you are in reference to upstream.
(I have actually never used or heard about 'git cherry' before.)

Git may be worse than hg on Windows, but IMHO git has better branching
and tagging.
Therefore I have the following suggestion:
Use git for the main repo and hg users install the hg-git plugin [1]
for seamless operation
with the main repo. I recently tested this setup and it worked great.
Win-win! :-)

[1]: http://hg-git.github.com/

Best regards,
Bjørn Forsman

--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss