54

I'm evaluating Visual Studio Add-ins for Mercurial. Currently, I've identified 3 potential candidates :

I'm looking for a comparison of features or capabilities.

Features that are important to me are: a tool that integrate well with VS, Open Source, actively developed, and robust.

StayOnTarget
  • 11,743
  • 10
  • 52
  • 81
Symbiosoft
  • 4,681
  • 6
  • 32
  • 46
  • 18
    Why do all these useful threads get closed because they are not 'constructive'? – Ben Power May 10 '13 at 05:19
  • 1
    Not enough TFS or Microsoft related? – Symbiosoft May 15 '13 at 17:08
  • 2
    this should not have been closed as non-constructive. I consider it very constructive. A case should be made for why this is marked the way that it is. Sklivvz, X.L.Ant, zessx, H.Muster, EdChum: do you have any actual comment on why this was done? – Zack Marrapese Jun 27 '13 at 23:24
  • i would have liked to see a reasoned discussion of alternatives. i'm disappointed to see that the mods don't consider VS users capable of having such a discussion without devlving into a flame-war. – Spongman Jul 24 '13 at 18:36
  • 2
    @Spongman Well, SO is not for discussions. It is only for questions which can be answered in a constructive way. "What is your experience" is far from being constructive. It is possible though that the question can be reformulated so that it outlines some exact features of the programs. This would be a completely different question though. It is closed for a good reason and should stand closed. – sashkello Sep 21 '13 at 15:16

2 Answers2

46

Well, let's compare the details of development:

  • VisualHg's page says it's stable. The last version release was March of this year and the latest changesets in the source are from 1 week ago.
  • HgSccPackage (better found here than your other link) was last updated in the VS Gallery 2 days ago. (It can also be found on bitbucket.)
  • Mercurial Toolbar's page says it's in alpha and was last updated March 2010. Of the three, it appears this one is not actively developed.

It appears [from skimming some text] that HgSccPackage has its own windows for graph logs and whatnot.

VisualHg on the other hand is more of a supplement to TortoiseHg. Many of the menu commands for VisualHg will open TortoiseHg windows. If you use TortoiseHg's UI, this consistency may be preferrable. From the screenshot I saw for HgSccPackage, you may find VisualHg's status icons more standard, as well.

Since you have only 2 choices, it really doesn't take much to try both and see which you prefer.

I have VisualHg installed, but tend to use TortoiseHg's Workbench more than VisualHg. VisualHg stays in use mainly for its automatic add, remove, rename, etc.

Joel B Fant
  • 24,406
  • 4
  • 66
  • 67
6

I have just finished researching the same question. It seems that VisualHG had its last version released a year and a half ago in Oct 2011. In all 2012 it had just 3 commits. Last version of HgSccPackage was released in Mar 2012 which is roughly a year ago, but it had a bunch of commits since then.

It seems that both tools are equally powerful, but HgSccPackage recieves more investment. I decided to go with HgSccPackage.

Alon Catz
  • 2,417
  • 1
  • 19
  • 23