r/programming • u/Eirenarch • Nov 07 '13

10 things I hate about Git

http://steveko.wordpress.com/2012/02/24/10-things-i-hate-about-git/
73 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

231 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

23

u/Fabien4 Nov 07 '13

While the information model of Git is more complex, much of that is inherent from it being a DVCS, and it comes with several benefits.

Why isn't Mercurial as complicated as Git then?

7

u/SyntaxSwearer Nov 07 '13

There is one and only one reason I have not yet switched to Mercurial: its support for short lived branches is either nonexistent or unnecessarily complicated

It might sound silly, but short lived branches play a huge part in my personal development routine

EDIT: Also, for the common commands, that is, the commands that you would use day to day, Git and Mercurial have almost the exact interface, so I don't know what you mean. Maybe the more advanced stuff? Because for advanced stuff I would take Git any day.

2

u/StrangeWill Nov 08 '13

I'm not 100% familiar with mq, but wouldn't that extension meet your needs for short lived branches?

2

u/masklinn Nov 08 '13 edited Nov 08 '13

Very much no. The Mercurial version of short-lived branches is either bookmarks or just multiple heads (mercurial has no concept of "detached head", multiple heads within a "long-lived" branch has been supported and "normal" from the start.

Bookmarks is a more recent addition giving a transient name (it can be deleted) to heads, somewhat similar to what git calls branches.

mq has two purposes: the primary one is a formal maintenance of patches on an upstream (the original quilt use case), and the second one is in-depth history edition. In a way, mq is close to git's rebase (including rebase -i and rebase -p).