From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: Deciding between Git/Mercurial Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:55:37 +0200 Message-ID: References: <200909292058.53045.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: SLONIK.AZ@gmail.com, Anteru , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 29 21:58:54 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MsiqY-0003oW-GR for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:58:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754021AbZI2T6l (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:58:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754004AbZI2T6k (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:58:40 -0400 Received: from imag.imag.fr ([129.88.30.1]:64740 "EHLO imag.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753933AbZI2T6k (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:58:40 -0400 Received: from archeboc.imag.fr (archeboc.imag.fr [129.88.43.1]) by imag.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n8TJtc8j021124 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:55:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bauges.imag.fr ([129.88.43.5]) by archeboc.imag.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MsinS-0004t6-0P; Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:55:38 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200909292058.53045.jnareb@gmail.com> (Jakub Narebski's message of "Tue\, 29 Sep 2009 20\:58\:50 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (imag.imag.fr [129.88.30.1]); Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:55:38 +0200 (CEST) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jakub Narebski writes: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Leo Razoumov wrote: >> On 2009-09-28, Jakub Narebski wrote: >> > [..snip..] >> > Besides with nonlinear history with >> > revision numbers such as 12678 and 12687 you know that 12678 is older >> > than 12687 if and only if 12678 and 12687 are on the same line of >> > development. >> >> The statement above is incorrect!! In a Mercurial repo local revision >> numbers are strictly ordered in commit time. 12678 < 12687 means that >> 12678 was committed prior to 12687. But these two commits could belong >> to two completely unrelated lines of development. > > This is impossible with distributed development. Yes, the accurate statement is (I think): "In a Mercurial repo local revision numbers are strictly ordered according _the time when the_ _commit entered the repository_" (i.e. the time you did a merge, not the time the other guy did the commit). Just tested: $ hg log changeset: 3:4d6db21df0cd tag: tip parent: 1:31f8406ae59c parent: 2:33bfb84a5113 user: Matthieu Moy date: Tue Sep 29 21:54:25 2009 +0200 summary: merge changeset: 2:33bfb84a5113 parent: 0:a508b050e5ae user: Matthieu Moy date: Tue Sep 29 21:54:02 2009 +0200 summary: in branch bar changeset: 1:31f8406ae59c user: Matthieu Moy date: Tue Sep 29 21:54:11 2009 +0200 summary: in branch foo changeset: 0:a508b050e5ae user: Matthieu Moy date: Tue Sep 29 21:53:33 2009 +0200 summary: init Either I have a time machine at home, or changesets 1 was not made before changeset 2. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/