4 ms·
My impression was always that Mercurial wasn't entirely stable/reliable. Especially the Windows port seemed rather prone to corruption.
by pricechild 8y ago
My impression was always that Mercurial wasn't entirely stable/reliable.
Especially the Windows port seemed rather prone to corruption.
- BeetleB 8y ago>Especially the Windows port seemed rather prone to corruption. Quite the opposite of my perception. I started with git. Then I got a job and for a while I worked only in Windows. At the time, I looked into git for Windows, and while everyone said it was stable, everyone also said that it was unofficial - the Git development team had stated clearly they were not interested in maintaining a Windows version. I didn't want to be in the position to justify an unofficial tool to my employer, so I looked at Mercurial - Windows support has been in there since the first day. So I switched to Mercurial. In almost a decade of using it on Windows, I have never had any problems. Mercurial is great - I've never come across a use case where git is clearly better.
- ygra 8y agoUnicode file names were a bit of a pain at one point. Haven't tried that again recently.