On 28/08/10 11:45, Johannes Held wrote: > José M. Prieto <jmprieto@xxxxxxx>: >> Git is very powerful, but not the easier one to use. I'd suggest darcs >> or mercurial better. > I used Darcs for a while and I liked its "theory of patches". But at some point > I was just fed up with having to decide about every line I changed. You need to learn of the '-a' argument for 'darcs record' :-) > With Git, I can stage selected changes and subsequently commit them, while in > Mercurial I have not found any comparable feature. True, but I still don't quite understand the point of the staging area. I've never found a good use for it. In short, I don't think the staging area is the feature that makes git a better option than Mercurial :-) For Mercurial you have patch queues which you can use in a way that allows you to do stuff similarly to the staging area of git. /M -- Magnus Therning (OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4) magnus＠therning．org Jabber: magnus＠therning．org http://therning.org/magnus identi.ca|twitter: magthe
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
