Subject: Re: Deciding between Git/Mercurial

From: Anteru <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 08:32:23 +0200

> First, you have to remember that this 'number of commit' thingy is
> *local* to your repository, so you cannot use commit numbers to
> communicate with other developers.  This is inherent and unavoidable
Ah cool, thanks for clarifying this.

>> So far, my key arguments are that git is more robust (more projects
>> using it, larger developer base), of course git's excellent performance
>> and the much better support for SVN, which is important for us as we can
>> slowly migrate from SVN->Git, while hgmercurial is still in the making
>> (and Python's SVN->Hg switch is for instance waiting for it).
> 
> hgmercurial? or hgsubversion?
hgsubversion of course, which is supposed to be what git-svn is already.
At the moment, I already use git with our SVN server, so I can show some
of the advantages (for instance, renaming works much better than with
SVN itself :) ), and I guess it also makes the migration easier as
everyone can try with Git locally and we switch from SVN to Git once
everyone has switched locally.

Thanks for all the input so far!

Cheers,
  Anteru