hgmq vs. StGIT

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Nov 1, 2005, 09:08 UTC
Message-ID: <20051101090804.GA11618@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20051101002554.GA7634@thunk.org>

Dear diary, on Tue, Nov 01, 2005 at 01:25:54AM CET, I got a letter where Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> told me that...

Show 11 quoted lines

> For an example of how to make it a first-class operation, it might be
> worthwhile to look at Chris Mason's "Mercurial Queues" extention to
> Mercurial:
> 
> 	http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/MqExtension
> 
> I've used it once or twice, and hg mq is definitely very nice and
> convenient, and it makes commits a first-class operation.  On the
> other hand, I've found that the combination of quilt and
> Mercurial/BK/git works just fine, even for my own internal development
> of (for example) the e2fsprogs tree.

Did anyone do any current detailed comparison between hg mq and StGIT?

I'm very happy with StGIT, modulo few UI gripes I'm still not getting
around to fix, and the fact that I cannot version my changes to patches
- this is one advantage of having quilt stuff tracked by GIT, I think,
but that feels ugly.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/
VI has two modes: the one in which it beeps and the one in which
it doesn't.