[Lazarus] Groundwork for Undo in Form Designer

[Aleksa Todorovic]

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 18:57, Florian Klaempfl <florian at freepascal.org> wrote:
>
> For a small project, I tried once mercurial and learned that it is much
> more work. One easily gets lost with all those cloned repositories none
> being naturally canonical. All not mentioning the pain of line feed
> handling: it felt worse than cvs and git isn't better in this regard:
> nothing does prevent users from committing and pushing a full diff due
> to f.... up line feeds.

I started using Mercurial some time ago, and I can say I'm really
satisfied with it:
- our company uses svn, but (although I'm svn admin) I constantly need
lot of branching and merging and since I do lot of work from home
where Internet connection is slow, DVCS was my real need
- I primarily develop on windows, and TortoseHg is really good at its
job - I even have Commit dialog opened all the time :-)
- as of line endings, there is win32text extension which conversions;
there is also possibility to reject files with non-unix line endings;
see http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/Win32TextExtension; I cannot
comment on quality of this extension, all I can say is that it exists
- I do not clone full repositories, but rather use named branches
(http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/NamedBranches) and bookmarks
(http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/BookmarksExtension) depending on my
need, and they work very well
- there are several possibilities of hg-svn integration, and I use
hgsubversion which allows me to pull/push (update/commit) directly to
svn server

Mercurial (as any other DVCS) definitely requires more technical
knowledge than SVN, so if you do not have real need for DVCS, just
stay with good-old SVN :-)