3 ms·
Yeah, I get the impression that in most meaningful ways hg is a better choice on a technical level. But git does have a few real advantaves. Git is faster, tho
by emn13 13y ago
Yeah, I get the impression that in most meaningful ways hg is a better choice on a technical level. But git does have a few real advantaves. Git is faster, though the difference is small enough that I can't imagine this being a serious issue. Git repo's are smaller, particular in the face of (directory) renames.
But the real advantage of git is its popularity. You present that as something worrying; but at the end of the day, hg and git aren't all that different, and popularity means pervasiveness means collaboration is easier - and that's worth something.
- jheriko 13y agoyou are correct. its popularity is an advantage, and this is precisely why i would want to use git - so many people are familiar with it and it almost seems like the standard solution today for source control. but its still worrying to me for its popularity. either i am fantastically stupid or people are happily using a tool without any idea what they are doing or how to resolve what i consider to be a very standard source control problem. these are both things for me to worry about. if you are wondering what i had such a hard time with here is a trivialised example: http://jheriko-rtw.blogspot.com/2013/11/why-i-hate-git.html http://jheriko-rtw.blogspot.com/2013/11/why-i-hate-git.html even if this problem is solvable and there is a solution this is a perfectly good way to approach problem solving - the problem is the lack of quality documentation and source materials to research a solution from.
- mrtngslr 13y agoVery sensible comment :) Having gained the most mind-share is Git's best feature, along with it's flexible branches and speed. Those features are super important and as a Mercurial developer, I'm very impressed with them.