> is it enough an improvement to justify the cost of switching? This is the main question everybody should be asking about potential contenders [0]. For most

> is it enough an improvement to justify the cost of switching? This is the main question everybody should be asking about potential contenders [0]. For most places, switching would be a huge undertaking. Even if there's an import tool that works flawlessly (big assumption), you now have to potentially re-think all of your secondary tooling [1]. Not just 3rd party tools, either. You have to think about potentially tweaking build pipelines, etc. Not to mention (re)training people which is very likely orders of magnitude more costly [2]. For any potential tool to overtake git, it will have to provide some pretty extreme benefits. Git originally provided some pretty extreme benefits over SVN and yet there are plenty of places that still can't justify the cost of even making that switch. [0]: I'm only talking about contenders for large projects and/or business' ecosystems. Use whatever you want on your side projects. [1]: GitLab adding support for alternatives is a good way to start mitigating this. [2]: In more ways than just purely financial.