D Programming Language source (dmd, phobos, etc.) has moved to github

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Lutger Blijdestijn" <lutger.blijdestijn at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ihn21d$2esd$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>
>> "David Nadlinger" <see at klickverbot.at> wrote in message
>> news:ihkub8$1ia4$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> On 1/24/11 10:20 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>>>>> Does Git really not have real revision/changeset numbers?
>>>>>
>>>>>[.]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not that I've actually used DVCSes much yet, but my understanding is
>>>> that the same can be set of Hg and yet Hg handles revision/changeset
>>>> numbers just
>>>> fine. The nice things (plural) about those is that they're both 
>>>> readable
>>>> and
>>>> comparable.
>>>
>>> Hg has no ?real revision/changeset numbers? either - there is a
>>> more-or-less-monotonic number assigned to the various changesets, but
>>> it's only valid for a single, *local* checkout, using them e.g. in a NG
>>> post would be a very wrong thing to do
>>> (http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/RevisionNumber).
>>>
>>
>> Even without really using DVCSes it always seemed clear to me that an
>> incremented number would be relative to a particular branch. So if you
>> specify what branch you're talking about (which could usually just be
>> assumed to be the main official one unless otherwise specified), 
>> shouldn't
>> that be enough?
>>
>>> Git supports a relative notation as well, which is what I personally 
>>> want
>>> to use most of the time anyway (e.g. HEAD^, master~4, something@{"1 year
>>> ago"}, .).
>>
>> Ah, so it *does* then? Great! Happen to have a link that explains it?
>>
>
> This covers most of it to see what's possible:
>
> http://progit.org/book/ch6-1.html
>
> You can customize git log with a format string, try this for example:
>
> git log --pretty=format:"%h - %an, %ar : %s %d"
>

Ahh, that's not remotely what I was hoping it was. Everything is all 
relative to the current version which means that *every* time you commit, 
*every* changeset gets completely renamed (HEAD@{5} becomes HEAD@{6}, etc), 
and there doesn't appear to be any syntax to refer to the next changeset 
(only the previous), which makes it barely useful at all. And not only that, 
but they *dissapear* after a certain amount of time.

Browsing through http://hginit.com/index.html, it looks like with Hg, 
everything works just as well as with SVN, the only difference being that 
you need to remember to specify which repository you're talking about 
whenever you give a number.

Obviously I'm not saying "DMD should have gone Hg", I'm just kinda shocked 
by how horrid Git's approach is for referring to changesets. (Personally, 
that alone would be enough to get me to use Hg instead of Git for my own 
projects. Heck, I've become pretty much sold on the idea of DVCS, but 
because of this I think I'd actually sooner use SVN for a new project than 
Git.)