3 ms·
Happened the SAME thing to me. Mercurial felt more natural than git. Back then, Github allowed you to choose the VC and Mercurial and Git were available, I'd al
by santiagobasulto 3y ago
Happened the SAME thing to me. Mercurial felt more natural than git. Back then, Github allowed you to choose the VC and Mercurial and Git were available, I'd always choose Mercurial. I was also using Google Code that allowed for mercurial as well.
Ahhhh, thanks for brining back those memories.
- antod 3y ago> Github allowed you to choose the VC and Mercurial and Git were available You're not thinking about BitBucket are you? I thought Github was always git only?
- pseudalopex 3y agoGitHub started with Git and added Subversion. Never Mercurial.
- antod 3y agoOh that's right - I'd forgotten about that april fools joke that wasn't. It was just client compatibility right - the backend was still git from memory? What I mean was that it wasn't like Bitbucket where you chose whether you wanted git or hg for starting your project.
- innocenat 3y agoBitBucket was Mercurial-only for quite some times before they added Git (when it was obvious that Git was winning). I think Google Code provide both from the early day (along with Subversion), and maybe also SourceForge.
- pseudalopex 3y agoSourceForge added Git, Mercurial, and Bazaar in 2009. Google Code added Mercurial in 2009. Bitbucket and Google Code added Git in 2011.
- jamesdwilson 3y agoI've used them all and Bazaar is my fav by far.