3 ms·
Honest non-snarky question . . . with Git becoming an industry standard, what is the case for using Mercurial? I'm asking because I've never used it or heard o
by psunavy03 3y ago
Honest non-snarky question . . . with Git becoming an industry standard, what is the case for using Mercurial? I'm asking because I've never used it or heard of anyone other than Meta doing so.
- bighead 3y agoMegarepo (read monorepo) setups probably ? anecdotally I’ve heard git having a problem with that use case.
- dotancohen 3y agoConsidering that the Linux kernel uses git, that particular anecdote's problems could probably be attributed to a cause other than their choice of VCS.
- sScTE9qEMCxEk34 3y agoThe Linux kernel is not particularly big by comparison. Although I suppose you could argue the cause is the choice of keeping so much in a single repo (I certainly would).
- readams 3y agoGoogle uses it also, though heavily customized.
- aidenn0 3y agoHistorically hg had the more intuitive interface[1] and git had better performance. Hg's performance has improved a lot (partly because Meta uses it). Git's interface has improved as well, but I know it too well now to say if it's as intuitive as hg; certainly many hg proponents say it is not. 1: I don't have any hard data for this, but I don't think it's overly controversial.