Overall, it's pretty easy to see the ordering of the commits, top to bottom, first commit to last commit.
Which VCS does not do that?
What are your favorite parts of git?
To be honest, I have none. Everything Git provides is done in a similar or nearly identical way with Mercurial, the one thing both don't do too well, namely: merging incompatible branches, is the unique selling point for Darcs/Pijul.
Whenever I need to use Git, I surely prefer GitKraken. -- Alright, there is one thing Git does very well: The ecosystem of GUIs is very mature, even better than SVN's. :-)
I'm a full stack developer working on building web applications for all sorts of sized companies using a wide variety of web technologies. Mostly working in Ruby and JavaScript.
the one thing both don't to too well, namely: merging incompatible branches, is the unique selling point for Darcs/Pijul.
I haven't used Darcs/Pijul before. But, I plan on writing somethings about merging/rebasing difficult branches. Which, probably isn't too different than what most people do, but there are ways to make merging less painful.
Whenever I need to use Git, I surely prefer GitKraken.
Yeah, I have used GitKraken, its the closest thing to a usable git GUI that I would use.
tux0r - have you written any posts on Pijul or Darcs? If not, you totally should! I think it would be really interesting to see a fresh perspective on what else is out there in the VCS world, and it would be a nice chance to highlight what non-Git source control systems bring to the table. I know a lot of people feel like Git has "won", but I myself have a soft spot for Mercurial, and I think having competition is essential to innovation in the space!
I find it sad to see that Atlassian does not advertise their own support for Mercurial. All you can find in their ads is Git here, Git there...
I haven't worked with Pijul yet. I made an account in their "nest" a while ago, but it's all too alpha-quality just yet. I have some private code on Darcshub though. No, I have not written anything about Darcs (yet?), Haskell is not my usual habitat. But I recommend everyone to spend half an hour with it. If you're not sold after that, you never will.
Currently developing futuristic smart-device, IoT connected, highway construction site safety system in EU.
Used to work on infrastructure, application architecture and cloud engineering.
I find it sad to see that Atlassian does not advertise their own support for Mercurial.
Nah, Atlassian does only what makes sales go high. Got a serious bug in Atlassian product? Wait few years until we finish new shiny graphical UI first!
No, Git and Mercurial are very different.
In Git, branches are just a point in a history, similar to tags, just with regular updates.
In Mercurial, every commit belongs to a specific branch and it matters, which branch you merge into which one.
Besides that, Git has many GUIs, but none is good.
They often are incomplete, difficult to use and do a lot of unintended stuff in the background.
Mercurial has TortoiseHG, which just works like the command line stuff, and you can use many advanced command line features in GUI as well.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Which VCS does not do that?
To be honest, I have none. Everything Git provides is done in a similar or nearly identical way with Mercurial, the one thing both don't do too well, namely: merging incompatible branches, is the unique selling point for Darcs/Pijul.
Whenever I need to use Git, I surely prefer GitKraken. -- Alright, there is one thing Git does very well: The ecosystem of GUIs is very mature, even better than SVN's. :-)
Just trying to start out on the right foot.
I haven't used Darcs/Pijul before. But, I plan on writing somethings about merging/rebasing difficult branches. Which, probably isn't too different than what most people do, but there are ways to make merging less painful.
Yeah, I have used GitKraken, its the closest thing to a usable git GUI that I would use.
I was disappointed with SourceTree.
I like Cycligent.
I thought GitKraken had the prettiest UI of the front-ends I've seen.
The only two problems I experienced with GitKraken, which is from a year or two ago:
It is still slow because it still uses Electron AFAIK.
Sourcetree is pretty good, though they have some annoying bugs once in a while.
tux0r - have you written any posts on Pijul or Darcs? If not, you totally should! I think it would be really interesting to see a fresh perspective on what else is out there in the VCS world, and it would be a nice chance to highlight what non-Git source control systems bring to the table. I know a lot of people feel like Git has "won", but I myself have a soft spot for Mercurial, and I think having competition is essential to innovation in the space!
I find it sad to see that Atlassian does not advertise their own support for Mercurial. All you can find in their ads is Git here, Git there...
I haven't worked with Pijul yet. I made an account in their "nest" a while ago, but it's all too alpha-quality just yet. I have some private code on Darcshub though. No, I have not written anything about Darcs (yet?), Haskell is not my usual habitat. But I recommend everyone to spend half an hour with it. If you're not sold after that, you never will.
Nah, Atlassian does only what makes sales go high. Got a serious bug in Atlassian product? Wait few years until we finish new shiny graphical UI first!
No, Git and Mercurial are very different.
In Git, branches are just a point in a history, similar to tags, just with regular updates.
In Mercurial, every commit belongs to a specific branch and it matters, which branch you merge into which one.
Besides that, Git has many GUIs, but none is good.
They often are incomplete, difficult to use and do a lot of unintended stuff in the background.
Mercurial has TortoiseHG, which just works like the command line stuff, and you can use many advanced command line features in GUI as well.