3 ms·
I always thought that Mercurial was designed for simplicity and minimalism, while Git was desinged for feature completeness. However, given the very late adopt
by vog 17y ago
I always thought that Mercurial was designed for simplicity and minimalism, while Git was desinged for feature completeness.
However, given the very late adoption of HTTP, and the extremely unsatisfactory implementation of "git pull", I wonder whether this is true anymore.
- dschobel 17y agoThe most honest technical assessment of the two I've seen yet came from the GoogleCode team when choosing which system to support: http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis
- schacon 17y agothat is a pretty seriously flawed report, and was even when it was released almost two years ago. even at the time, nearly everything in both the "Git Advantages" and "Mercurial Advantages" sections are either plain wrong or misunderstood. either ignore the report entirely, or read the comments with point out most of the issues.
- brodie 17y agoIs it? I saw a couple of comments that rightfully pointed out some minor things the analysis ignored like git's reflog and denyNonFastforwards, but it seems reasonable to me beyond that. What other issues are there with the report?