Python Goes Mercurial

[andrew cooke]

Echo wrote:
> 2009/4/2 Jeremiah Dodds <jeremiah.dodds at gmail.com>
>
>> The one thing that makes me want to use git more than any other dvcs is
>> that you don't have to create a new directory for branches. This may be
>> possible in other dvcs's , but git is the only one I've seen advertise
>> the
>> capability.
[...]
> That is the main reason why I switched to git at my work.
> As for the git rebase, I don't ever plan on using that 'feature'. Even
> though I would rather have had GvR pick git, I think he did a good job
> deciding.

please can you explain this?  i can think of a couple of things you could
mean, but neither of them seem to make much sense to me.


one is that hg only allows you one branch per repository.  i checked the
docs and that's not true - see 2/3 way down
http://hgbook.red-bean.com/read/managing-releases-and-branchy-development.html
- which describes how you can branch in the repository and then swap your
working copy between them.


another is that you want a directory structure like:

myproject/
  tag1/
  tag2/

and for there to be a single repository in myproject, rather than two
repositories, one in tag1 and one in tag2.  since a dvcs works across
repos as well as it works within a repo, i don't see how this is
significantly different to having two repositories, one in tag1 and one in
tag2.  how does it matter?


or do you mean something else?


i don't use a dvcs myself - i'm happy with svn - but i am curious about
what the advantages and disadvantages might be.

thanks,
andrew