Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Ah, okay. Well Git can definitely manage this. Just means you have to > rebase any local changes before pushing. This will keep the history > linear and make sure that no merges are needed in the case you were asking > about. Sure. As I said before, the little add-on of checkouts is that you say once "I don't want to do local commit here", and bzr reminds you this each time you commit. Well, where it can make a difference is that it does it in a transactional way, that is, you don't have that little window between the time you pull and the time you push your next commit. But this would really be bad luck ;-). > So far, it sounds to me like bazaar and git are more alike than they are > different. Each have a few commands the other doesn't but all in all > they sound very similar. Sure. And at least, if you want to prove that your decentralized SCM is the best, you'd better look at features other than the ability to commit on a local branch ;-). If you want a _real_ flamewar, better talk about rename management or revision identity. The thing is that most people migrated from CVS/svn, so they found their new SCM to be incredibly better the existing. But it's generally not _so_ much better than the other modern alternatives ;-). (and don't forget to thank Darcs and Monotone who brought most of the good ideas you and I are using) > But i'm a Git fanboy so I aint switching now ;o) Probably not going to switch either, but that might happen. -- Matthieu - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html