Beren Minor <beren.minor+boost@gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:33 AM, Sergiu Dotenco <sergiu.dotenco@gmail.com> wrote:
On 20.03.2012 10:56, Beren Minor wrote: The interpretation of Google hits as a popularity measure is very bold. The results you're mentioning can also suggest that Git users are more likely to require additional support. In previous comments, which you haven't read, it has been pointed out that the perceivable market share does not correlate with how well a tool integrates with a system. This is especially true when comparing Git and Mercurial.
Let's compare open-source projects on Ohloh then instead of Google if you like it more http://www.ohloh.net/repositories/compare, but's it's not what I wanted to point out. As I said, I won't be able to provide any argument convincing everyone anyway.
Ohloh is a particularly bad statistic to use: I think they've crawled GitHub and not Bitbucket and Launchpad (there are many more Bazaar projects than the ones Ohloh list, and there are more Mercurial projects than Bazaar projects). -- Martin Geisler aragost Trifork -- Professional Mercurial support http://www.aragost.com/mercurial/