Promoting the use of Mercurial; was: Re: gnome dvcs survey results

[Peter Arrenbrecht]

On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Thomas Burdick <thomas.burdick at gmail.com> wrote:
> TortoiseHg could help win some of the people I work with over if it had some
> usability work done on it. I don't know if its the use of toolbox buttons
> instead of form buttons, gtk+ (it looks plain wrong in windows...), or a
> combination of both but no one I've talked to thought the UI was intuitive.
> #1 complaint/issue was workflow - typically you go down a form, and the
> buttons to operate things are at the top. I don't think the other tortoise's
> do this
> #2 complaint/issue - why aren't the commands the same for the tortoise menu
> as hg help. what is synchronize and why don't I get things like pull, push,
> update, revert, rollback etc as menu options instead of this silly business
> with toolbox buttons. I try telling these guys "pull" and "push" and  they
> ask me, where is push/pull in the menu.

Well, part of the Summer of Code project was to do such changes.
Sadly, they weren't accepted into TortoiseHg. The student had got rid
of the close buttons, redone some dialogs to better follow established
style, etc. And there was a Debian package, too. Maybe I wasn't
insistent enough to help him get it into THg. Problem is, I'm not a
core THg developer myself, so coaching this project was a little
difficult. But this work still exists! Maybe it can still serve as a
basis:

  http://www.bitbucket.org/gpoo/soc/overview/

-parren

> Qct looks just fine actually, personally I thought it was the nicest looking
> (Qt4 seems to look nicer on windows). Can't you specify to use the wimp
> theme or whatever it is when using gtk by default? Anyways, just some
> thoughts.
> -Tom
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:44 PM, David Soria Parra <sn_ at gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>> Theodore Tso schrieb:
>> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 04:29:37PM +0100, Isaac Jurado wrote:
>> >>> BTW, Mercurial really needs to add better support for renaming and
>> >>> deleting branches to best support this particular workflow...
>> >> You mean better support for renaming and delecting bookmarks, right?
>> >
>> > Well, if you're going to use bookmarks instead of hg's native
>> > branches, when you need is support for the concept of the "current"
>> > bookmark, so that commits only affect the "current" bookmark, and not
>> This is already in crew and will be in hg 1.2.
>>
>> > all of the bookmarks that happen to be pointing at thecommit.  Also
>> > needed is support for being able to push and pull bookmarks, so they
>> > can be (optionally) shared beyond the local repository, and the
>> > ability to PGP sign bookmarks.  The first is probably the highest
>> > priority, followed by push/pull of bokmarks and followed next by PGP
>> > signing of bookmarks.
>>
>> I'm not sure why it is needed to sign bookmarks. As far as I know it is
>> not possible to sign
>> git branches. But I agree that push/pull is a big thing, but it requires
>> a wire protocol change.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mercurial mailing list
>> Mercurial at selenic.com
>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>
>