Thanks for the hg facilities!

[Steve Barnes]

On 04/01/15 09:08, Harry . wrote:
> arne_bab worte:
>
>>> Seconded. Wouldn't mind smaller repositories
>> Did you try the size with different repositories? In my tests, git and
>> hg are very close in size, but git repos enlarge a lot when you don’t
>> repack + garbage collect regularly (and auto-gc does not cut it).
> After moving some large binary dependencies around within the source tree, git repo is a small fraction the size of hg repo. Happens to a lesser extent when moving lots of text files as well.
>
> Another trigger for this is lots of similar files - came up on the list recently with translated resources.
>
>>> and git-style tags either.
>> unversioned, centralized, “follow the canonical repo” tags? Something
>> like bookmarks which don’t follow your changes?
> Yes, exactly that.
>
>> Or is there a central usability issue which disturbs you when using
>> hg tags?
> Tagging polluting the commit log, and the daft situation where updating to a tag loses it.
>   		 	   		
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
Just to add my 2¢: Almost all VSCs have issues with large binary files - 
they are after all not source code - and Mercurial has a very nice way 
of avoiding the issue with the Large Files extension.

Gadget/Steve