We used mercurial for almost a year before the team rebelled and forced a switch back to SVN. :) It was all of our first experience with a DVCS. It's not jus

We used mercurial for almost a year before the team rebelled and forced a switch back to SVN. :) It was all of our first experience with a DVCS. It's not just cherry picking - if you've spread changes across multiple commits, it's much more difficult to manage them. Yes, you can diff cross revisions. But that's more awkward. Worse - if you commit so you can merge in changes from the mainline, all of your changes get lumped together - which may be logically different fixes - and some may even be debugging code that definitely shouldn't end up in the mainline. If you later need to push a subset of your changes, you're in for a world of hurt. I guess if you get people to use patch queues religiously, you can work around this. But patch queues (in mercurial at least) are definitely rough around the edges, and have their own share of problems. I'm guessing this process is better in Git. But if I can't deal with the interface, there's no way I'm going to convince the rest of the team to do so. If people have suggestions on how to deal with this kind of stuff, I'd love to hear people's suggestions. My HN username @ gmail.