Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 08:51:39 +0200 From: Dominic Fandrey <kamikaze@bsdforen.de> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: jhell@DataIX.net, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: autoconf update Message-ID: <4C94617B.3080702@bsdforen.de> In-Reply-To: <4c93f602.pzTXVEQ%2B3q2cRA23%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <4C91446F.3090202@bsdforen.de> <20100916171744.GA48415@hades.panopticon> <4C927ED0.5050307@bsdforen.de> <86zkvhfhaa.fsf@gmail.com> <4C92C14D.3010005@FreeBSD.org> <4C92F195.5000605@FreeBSD.org> <4C93A107.4070809@DataIX.net> <4c93f602.pzTXVEQ%2B3q2cRA23%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18/09/2010 01:13, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > jhell <jhell@DataIX.net> wrote: > >> ... Mercurial being the distributed version control that it is >> allows you to clone, make the changes you need to the clone test it >> thoroughly and then either push or pull them to the main tree ... > > At the risk of starting the VCS variant of the vi vs emacs wars :) > why Mercurial (rather than, say, GIT or SVK)? > > And no, I have nothing against Mercurial. I don't know _any_ > distributed VCS well enough to have an opinion of which would > be best suited. There is great documentation and re-education material (for SVN users) out there for Mercurial. But this is not going to happen any way. The ports are still stuck with _CVS_. -- A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C94617B.3080702>