3 ms·
Yep. I think that's mostly it. Linux backed, followed by GitHub sold the deal. The incumbents were possibly better but were too forked to individually beat t
by aaron695 6y ago
Yep. I think that's mostly it.
Linux backed, followed by GitHub sold the deal.
The incumbents were possibly better but were too forked to individually beat that team. It became a standard like English as someone else pointed out.
- dwheeler 6y agoThere's more to it than that. I think mercurial's user interface has its advantages, but when they were facing off each other, git was far faster and quickly added more advanced capabilities. Power users preferred the speed, and they were the ones generally deciding which version control systems to use. But that does not mean that git's user interface is perfect. I think there are many things that could be done to make it much easier to understand and use by non power users.
- aaron695 6y agoI agree Git won the power users. I think perhaps all that's needed is a GUI front end that ignores the structure of Git and just gives non-power users what they want. Like one button. Backup, delete repo, re-pull and re-add my changes. No explanation of what's doing under the hood. Simplify branches for simple repos. Power users can do their thing seperate. And improve GitHub. A WYSIWYG to edit .md files for instance. I think it's not impossible to get Git and GitHub good.