Fossil is amazing, but a) it lacks Git's deployment at scale experience, and b) it's too opinionated, like Mercurial. (a) means that, for example, the Windows

Fossil is amazing, but a) it lacks Git's deployment at scale experience, and b) it's too opinionated, like Mercurial. (a) means that, for example, the Windows source code can never fit in a Fossil repository. The issue is that the SQL metadata alone is daunting. Git devs have developed a bunch of techniques for dealing with this, such as shallow clones, partial clones, and the use of Bloom filters for speeding up git log traversal (for, e.g., `git blame`). (b) is just terribly obnoxious. Rebase == script around cherry-pick. Fossil provides cherry-picking. Fossil refuses to provide rebase. Mercurial too went through the same opinionated stage and then landed at providing all the things that Git power users want. Until Fossil improves this, for example, I can't be bothered to use it much. Why would you reject a huge portion of your audience, especially power users who can influence projects to choose your DVCS?