Search type Search syntax
Tags [tag]
Exact "words here"
Author user:1234
user:me (yours)
Score score:3 (3+)
score:0 (none)
Answers answers:3 (3+)
answers:0 (none)
Views views:250
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*"
Favorites infavorites:mine
Status closed:yes
Types is:question
Exclude -[tag]
For more details on advanced search visit our help page
Results tagged with Search options answers only user 2439

Git is an open-source DVCS (Distributed Version Control System)

Why not try the approach with Markdown - that way, you can have HTML with images, and the "original" will still be in plain textual format, easy for diff.
answered Dec 1 '11 by Rook
" examples. Now most of features of one system can be emulated in another and vice versa, but that requires some knowledge in Git, while in Mercurial the defaults (if you'll allow me to call them that) are … than the other. Just to make the answer complete; I use git, but when recommending a VCS for someone who's "new to them", I almost always recommend Mercurial. I remember, when it first came into my hands, it felt very intuitive. It is my experience that Mercurial produces less wtf/minute than Git. …
answered Jun 27 '11 by Rook
To stage a file is simply to prepare it finely for a commit. Git, with its index allows you to commit only certain parts of the changes you've done since the last commit. Say you're working on two …
answered Nov 15 '11 by Rook
Unless there exists a specific reason for you to think that each one of them deserves an invidual repo (Will they grow a lot? Probably not!) it seems more reasonable to put them all in one repo, and s …
answered Nov 4 '11 by Rook
someone coming from one of the old generation VCS's. Points in hand: Mercurial was developed with Windows in mind; Git was ported. No matter what anyone tried to tell me, Git is still a second rate … works very nicely, and Visual Studio implementations are even easier to use without breaking your workflow. If someone starts the discussion "Git is more powerful after you ...", then he's pretty much …
answered Oct 28 '11 by Rook
Of course, this depends on the user and practices followed, but branches are usually deleted after merging. git branch -d branchname For example, after the following merge, you would delete the … branch iss53, as you don't need to develop from that branch anymore. You can later recreate it at any moment using the sha1 value of the commit by git checkout -b <name> <sha1>. …
answered Jun 28 '11 by Rook
This is all relative, and like maple_shaft said, if one works for you, don't change! But if you really want something, I'd say it is maybe better for designers, web programmers and such - it handles …
answered Sep 30 '11 by Rook