hgk issues on win32

[Lee Cantey]

On 2/6/07, Bela Babik <teki321 at gmail.com> wrote:
> My biggest problem with mercurial is it's distribution.
> It is distributed
> as a standalone application on Windows, but it is possible to install from
> source too. It is possible to use through bash, and working like a charm,
> but all tools are written for the standalone version.

I think alot of people use it from source day to day and I believe
most of the tools work with it that way.

> I think that a py2exe based
> distribution doesn't make any sense. Just check
>  the Qct. I already have got python installed on my machine. If I am
> installing
> mercurial + qct, then I will have 3 python
> binaries. An egg based distribution
> makes much more sense to me, but I didn't checked the details.

Egg based distribution sounds great as an option, but it's not
particularly mainstream and certainly not obvious to someone who just
wants to use Mercurial as a tool.  As far as multiple copies of Python
go, what specifically is your issue here?  The 9MB or so that a
Mercurial install takes?

> If I have to use the cmd.exe, then I could move to darcs, which is a good
> dvcs
> too, but requires the cmd.exe as shell, which is not as productive as a bash
> shell.

I'm not sure what you're saying here.  I thought you said it was
working fine under bash?

Regards,
Lee