"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
Indeed ... but I can do exactly the same thing with branches, and
don't need to learn a separate tool, with a rather complex UI. The
task that MQ is designed for (managing "large" collections of patches)
simply isn't relevant to my life (I learned that when I was trying
Darcs out on XEmacs). Basically, I don't work on any read-only
codebases, so patch management is always Somebody Else's Problem
(except for XEmacs 21.4, but there patch management is Vin's Problem,
not mine :-).
I don't know what to say to that: I find git's base UI rather complex,
and I'm still banging my head against it whenever I have to use it. I'm
probably trying to use it the wrong way, but I've found its
documentation to be of little help. (No doubt due to my predisposition,
so there.) With Mercurial, the most efficient ways of using it are
clearly documented---it seems you just don't like using them.
Also, I found the way that changesets disappeared and changed
identity
across a pop/push cycle was disconcerting.
Huh?
--
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta