On 10/26/08, Maxim Vuets <maxim.vuets@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 26 Oct 2008 15:15:57 +0100, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 1. Documentation and ease of use. > > > > Mercurial is supposedly better documented and easier to use; I > > think this descends from the early days of Git, where it was not > > very user friendly. IMHO Git has much improved since. Mercurial > > had 'hgbook' from the beginning; Git User's Manual is more recent. > > > Also, there is http://book.git-scm.com/ that is similar to hgbook, I think. > > Thanks for the comprarision! I have been using Mercurial for about two years and am very comfortable with it. Here are some cons and pros Mercurial PROS: * Easier and more consistent UI. Newbie friendly. * Better documentation. IMHO, hgbook is by far better than http://book.git-scm.com/ * Windows support (personally, I do not care) Mercurial CONS: * Less potential than git. Once Ted Tso even said that "git has more legs than mercurial", see http://thunk.org/tytso/blog/2007/03/24/git-and-hg/ * Hg is strictly an SCM system while GIT is a content addressable file system that can be used in other ways, hence the name Global Information Tracker (GIT) * Recently, Hg development seems to have somewhat slowed down. To simply put it, there is not enough room in the world for several similar SCM systems. With git's pace and momentum the other SCMs including Hg are fighting an uphill battle. Just my two cents. --Leo-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
