On 2012.03.19 13.17, Dave Abrahams wrote:
on Mon Mar 19 2012, Sergiu Dotenco <sergiu.dotenco-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
On 19.03.2012 15:02, Daryle Walker wrote:
Git has a competitor called Mercurial? If we're moving to a Distributed-VCS, should we go to Mercurial instead of Git? They're kind-of like CVS vs. Subversion, except I think they came up in parallel. (While Subversion was designed as an updated CVS.) I think Git was made up of a bunch of script hacks, while Mercurial was a regimented single program. I don't have a preference, but I want to make sure we consider the rival options. Daryle W.
While we're at it, Google's analysis of Git and Mercurial shouldn't be neglected:
That analysis completely ignores the (most?) important factors, mindshare and marketplace.
Uh, can you provide some data for this, please? The two major surveys I know contradict this. http://www.eclipse.org/org/community_survey/Eclipse_Survey_2011_Report.pdf, page 16 http://blogs.forrester.com/application_development/2010/01/forrester-databyt... -- Bryce Lelbach aka wash STE||AR Group, Center for Computation and Science, LSU -- boost-spirit.com stellar.cct.lsu.edu llvm.wiki.kernel.org