Re: Mercurial - Distributed SCM in Gnome (Was: Git vs SVN (was: Can we improve things?))

Hi all,

> >
> > In my opinion Mercurial has much of the benefits of GIT but with the
> > ease of use of SVN.  We dropped GIT and SVN at my company in favor of
> > Mercurial.
> In what way is Mercurial simpler to use than Git? Looking quickly at
> the Mercurial docs it seemed quite similar to Git in terms of
> complexity.
> I've found most distributed scm's to be similarly complex (not
> considering early versions Git and Arch, etc). The complexity of
> distributed scm's are in the areas where CVS/Svn can't even operate.

I think as well that mercurial is very easy to use compared to git,
but am not sure about the merge capabilities of Mercurial. I think
that git complexity comes from the extension mechanism used by git :

Basically git is extended by writing shell scripts and perl scripts
that create new commands, for example git-svn looks like a completely
separate tool, where as bzr-svn for example just integrates into bzr,
and any bzr command works on the svn repo as if it was a bzr repo or a
bzr branch.

git looks like a patchwork from my point of view, it reminds me
another very popular and ugly tool commonly used : autotools.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]