Re: Deciding between Git/Mercurial

Jakub Narebski [off-list ref] writes:

On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Leo Razoumov wrote:

quoted

On 2009-09-28, Jakub Narebski [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

[..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 [off-list ref]
date:        Tue Sep 29 21:54:25 2009 +0200
summary:     merge

changeset:   2:33bfb84a5113
parent:      0:a508b050e5ae
user:        Matthieu Moy [off-list ref]
date:        Tue Sep 29 21:54:02 2009 +0200
summary:     in branch bar

changeset:   1:31f8406ae59c
user:        Matthieu Moy [off-list ref]
date:        Tue Sep 29 21:54:11 2009 +0200
summary:     in branch foo

changeset:   0:a508b050e5ae
user:        Matthieu Moy [off-list ref]
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/