Skip to main content
Software Engineering

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

9
  • 65
    Stackoverflow hits may indicate "difficulty", not "popularity". Commented Jan 6, 2012 at 18:44
  • 6
    Git wins in google trends, github wins over bitbucket, BUT - afaik many commercial companies prefer Mercurial over Git, so its quite possible that while Git has more people using it, Hg has more money bet on. Commented Jan 6, 2012 at 19:00
  • What is the reason companies prefer Mercurial over Git? Commented Jan 6, 2012 at 22:36
  • 11
    Reasons like these I would suppose: stackoverflow.com/a/892688/224087 or ericsink.com/entries/hg_denzel.html or stevelosh.com/blog/2010/01/… I too think Mercurial is more polished and easier to approach. Tool quality is also a factor. The Mercurial experience is clearly better than Git's on Windows. Also, we use FogBugz and Kiln, which make a very nice integrated bug/task tracker and source code control package. For personal code, bitbucket had better pricing (I could get away with free plan, where I could not on github) Commented Jan 6, 2012 at 23:29
  • 1
    @ThorbjørnRavnAndersen Totally agree. I find git to have quite the learning curve where mercurial seems to have a less steep curve. Its hard to judge something on the metrics of hits...Who knows. Perhaps the most popular tool is the one with the lowest hits because nobody needs to ask for help :) Commented Jun 26, 2012 at 21:17