Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>As others have indicated, almost but not quite. In order of decreasing similarity to <code>svn update</code> (and increasing compliance with general DVCS, and specifically Mercurial, best practices[1]):</p> <ol> <li><p><code>hg pull -u</code> (or <code>hg pull</code> followed by <code>hg update</code>) with your changes uncommitted and no committed changes since your last pull. This is as close to <code>svn update</code> as you can get, but is pretty bad DVCS practice. One of the niceties of DVCS is that you can commit your changes before trying to merge them with others, and thus have a backup version to rollback and retry a failed merge, and this practice gives that up. Don't do it.</p></li> <li><p><code>hg pull --rebase</code> after committing your changes. This pulls the upstream changes, re-applies your changes on top of them, and lets you push your changes back as a linear history. The end result will look very similar to a Subversion revision history, but you get the DVCS benefit of committing before merging. I do not know how the safety of this mode of operation compares between Mercurial and Git, though; in Git, pre-rebase versions of your changes will still be there until you do a <code>git gc</code>, but Mercurial doesn't have an explicit <code>gc</code> safety net.</p></li> <li><p><code>hg pull</code> followed by <code>hg merge</code> with your changes already committed to your local copy. This is the traditional Mercurial practice for doing the functional analog of <code>svn update</code>, notwithstanding footnote 1 below. This results in a nonlinear version history, but all changes are tracked and inspectable.</p></li> </ol> <p>That said, there is much wisdom in thinking of Mercurial (and other DVCSes) on their own terms, and not trying to translate from Subversion/CVS-style thinking.</p> <ol> <li>If you are not of the rewrite-history-to-keep-it-linear school of thought. If you are, then <code>rebase</code> is probably preferable to <code>update</code>. The Mercurial community tends to favor <code>update</code>.</li> </ol>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POIs `hg pull --rebase` analogous to `svn update`?
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. USMichael Ekstrand
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POIs `hg pull --rebase` analogous to `svn update`?
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTAcceptedByOriginator
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COThis is a great answer. It doesn't just try to explain hg. It really tries to explain it in comparison to svn, which I specifically asked for in my question. It not only explains the differences, which others strongly emphasized, it explains the similarities. This answer also tries to cover all the related hg commands that I'm confused about and doesn't narrowly focus on hg pull --rebase.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USallyourcode
    2. COThe one follow up question I had was this: it seems like hg update would only be useful if you've never made any commits (as in case 1), because after that, you'll be working off a branch that no one else knows about. Again, this assumes a work flow involving a blessed central repo that members of a team push to and pull from.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USallyourcode
    3. CO@allyourcode If you have local changes, yes, you need merge rather than update. However, update is also how you switch revisions or named branches, and is useful once your changes are pushed upstream. If you need to merge and try to update, update will fail, so I usually use update first and merge if it fails.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USMichael Ekstrand
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload