3 ms·
I would have fussed going from Mercurial to git. Mercurial is arguably superior, much like Fossil, but unfortunately mindshare / marketshare is everything. The
by no_wizard 4y ago
I would have fussed going from Mercurial to git. Mercurial is arguably superior, much like Fossil, but unfortunately mindshare / marketshare is everything.
The layering model of merging in both those systems is superior to the standard git merge (rebase is close though). they also made cherry picking a trivial operation compared to git
- icelancer 4y agoYeah, I was gonna say exactly this. When I switched from SVN to hg that was a bit of a shock, but I got over it and saw that DVCS was superior. Going from hg to git has been fairly annoying and... I'm not really convinced it's any better. Or maybe even at parity.
- eikenberry 4y agoI willingly switched from Mercuial to Git due to, at the time, lack of in-repo branching and lack of history editing. IMO Mercurial shot themselves in the foot with some of their early decisions.