Home/ Questions/Q 6631191
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-25T22:30:41+00:00

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

  • 0

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.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    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.

    • 0