4 ms·
Mercurial was there, was better and more complete. Too sad it didnt win the VCS wars.
by xtracto 6mo ago
Mercurial was there, was better and more complete.
Too sad it didnt win the VCS wars.
- seanhunter 6mo agoWhen I tried both at that time hg was just really slow so I just adopted git for all my personal projects because it was fast and a lot better than cvs. I imagine others were the same.
- bombcar 6mo agoI went with bzr mainly because it had an easy way to plugin "revision" into my documents in a way I could understand and monotonously increment. hg was slow though I don't know how bzr compared as I was using it pretty light-weight.
- pseudalopex 6mo agoMercurial and Git started around the same time. Linus worried BitMover could threaten Mercurial developers because Mercurial and BitKeeper were more similar.