3 ms·

Can you extrapolate? I've never liked Tortoise*, preferring to stick to the command line - how is T-Git better?

kevingadd 15y ago
TortoiseGit's UI is much better designed than TortoiseHG's - operations you want to perform tend to be exposed in more obvious places, with clearer names and simpler UIs. In many cases it offers commands that encapsulate a set of underlying operations; for example, TortoiseGit offers subversion-style Commit and Revert dialog boxes that behave like the equivalent dialog boxes in TortoiseSvn, even though Git has no directly analogous commands. This is really good if you want to get work done without being a Git expert. In particular, Rebase in TortoiseGit has an excellent user interface that takes Git's command line rebasing process and turns it into a user-friendly graphical equivalent. I've yet to find any equivalently pleasant user interfaces in TortoiseHG; pretty much all of TortoiseHG's user interfaces are tangled messes of dropdown menus and checkboxes that try to reproduce every mercurial configuration switch. TortoiseGit is also faster and more stable than TortoiseHG. I'm not sure if this is because TortoiseHG is largely written in Python+QT, or just because TortoiseGit is more mature - I use TortoiseHG a lot at work when interacting with mercurial repositories, and it crashes frequently, but I've never had TortoiseGit crash or freeze on me. There are also a lot of UX problems with TortoiseHG that seem to originate in the design of Mercurial, though, so this may come down to my personal taste.
- pnathan 15y ago
  I tried to use TortoiseGit. I found it a practically unusable GUI compared to TortoiseHG.
- alexandrul 15y ago
  Given that both tools have their ups and downs, my reasons for picking TortoiseHg for Windows development are listed on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2550091/best-support-now-on-windows-mercurial-or-git/2575991#2575991 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2550091/best-support-now-...
stonemetal 15y ago
TortoiseHG's gui needs a designer. I have just about come to the conclusion it was made by someone who doesn't like HG as a joke. It doesn't use HG's terminology, it is fairly unintuitive.

TortoiseGit's UI is much better designed than TortoiseHG's - operations you want to perform tend to be exposed in more obvious places, with clearer names and simpler UIs. In many cases it offers commands that encapsulate a set of underlying operations; for example, TortoiseGit offers subversion-style Commit and Revert dialog boxes that behave like the equivalent dialog boxes in TortoiseSvn, even though Git has no directly analogous commands. This is really good if you want to get work done without being a Git expert. In particular, Rebase in TortoiseGit has an excellent user interface that takes Git's command line rebasing process and turns it into a user-friendly graphical equivalent. I've yet to find any equivalently pleasant user interfaces in TortoiseHG; pretty much all of TortoiseHG's user interfaces are tangled messes of dropdown menus and checkboxes that try to reproduce every mercurial configuration switch. TortoiseGit is also faster and more stable than TortoiseHG. I'm not sure if this is because TortoiseHG is largely written in Python+QT, or just because TortoiseGit is more mature - I use TortoiseHG a lot at work when interacting with mercurial repositories, and it crashes frequently, but I've never had TortoiseGit crash or freeze on me. There are also a lot of UX problems with TortoiseHG that seem to originate in the design of Mercurial, though, so this may come down to my personal taste.

pnathan 15y ago
I tried to use TortoiseGit. I found it a practically unusable GUI compared to TortoiseHG.
alexandrul 15y ago
Given that both tools have their ups and downs, my reasons for picking TortoiseHg for Windows development are listed on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2550091/best-support-now-on-windows-mercurial-or-git/2575991#2575991 http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2550091/best-support-now-...

stonemetal 15y ago

TortoiseHG's gui needs a designer. I have just about come to the conclusion it was made by someone who doesn't like HG as a joke. It doesn't use HG's terminology, it is fairly unintuitive.