On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Fernando Perez <fperez....@gmail.com> wrote: > In bzr (and as far as I see, also in hg), this kind of history > rewriting is near impossible, so the best you can do is make a merge > commit and leave all that history in there, visible in the 'second > level' log (indented in the text view). As a project grows many > developers, having all this history merged back into the main project > tree gets unwieldy.
Great email. Exactly, that's my experience with hg, it makes it nearly impossible, without misusing mercurial queues. I am just surprised, you have exactly the same experience with bzr, I thought it's only hg. As an amusing story, my roommate here at UNR also switched from svn to hg and was telling me, you know, git is too unfriendly, hg does everything I ever need. I was telling myself, well, after you really start using it, you'll maybe switch to git. Then after couple months he once told me -- "I had to rewrite history, so I tried MQ and that's a disaster, the interface to it is horrible. So I switched to git." I was thinking about Fernando just yesterday, asking myself, hm, I wonder how he is satisfied with bzr. So this email really made me laugh. :) > As for what numpy/scipy should do, I'll leave that to those who > actually contribute to the projects :) I just hope that this view is Exactly, this decision should be done by numpy developers, not me either. > useful to anyone who wants to think about the problem from an angle > different to that of specific commands, benchmarks or features :) Ondrej _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
