Comments on: Gitifyhg: Accessing Mercurial repos from GIT

By: Dusty's Diverse Domain » Blog Archive » Gitifyhg is now awesome.

Dusty's Diverse Domain » Blog Archive » Gitifyhg is now awesome. — Sun, 06 Jan 2013 04:21:30 +0000

[...] from Mercurial repositories. I described the first implementation, which used hg-git internally, last month. However, I found that it didn’t work as well in practice as my initial tests had indicated, [...]

By: Luke Plant

Luke Plant — Sat, 15 Dec 2012 16:37:17 +0000

I too am curious about the “restrictions” that Mercurial places on you. If anything I’ve found git more restrictive – for example, you have to have a branch pointing to a changeset to commit code at that point, whereas hg allows you to have anonymous branches anywhere.

I also use git and hg every day, and I’m constantly annoyed by git’s totally insane, verbose and inconsistent UI. The only nice UI features that git has thought up are “commit –amend” and “add -p”, and hg has copied both of those, but better: “hg record” does “git add -p && git commit”, which is what you actually always want, and both “commit” and “record” now take the “–amend” option.

By: Dusty Phillips

Dusty Phillips — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:05:15 +0000

Man, I wish I’d found that before I started on this!

By: Petri Lehtinen

Petri Lehtinen — Tue, 04 Dec 2012 10:31:42 +0000

I’ve been using my own git-hg script for over a year now, see https://github.com/akheron/git-hg. It uses hg-git and has quite many features compared to what gitifyhg currently has. Hope you get some ideas from it.

By: J_Zar

J_Zar — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 21:09:58 +0000

I’m pretty curious to know more about “Mercurial’s inadequacies”. Please could you specify in more depth your concerns?
I’m currently working in a company using git and… every day I end up thinking that hg could do the same and even better.