Skip to main content

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*

18
  • 5
    +1 It's all in the branches. This analysis discusses the merging power of git in comparison with mercurial. Commented Jul 29, 2011 at 12:21
  • 19
    @AmV: Please do not post obfuscated URLs. Commented Jul 29, 2011 at 13:16
  • 3
    AmV-link: felipec.wordpress.com/2011/01/16/… Commented Jul 29, 2011 at 13:30
  • 4
    I'm not sure I see your point here. You're saying that they're equally good at branching (Git does nothing that Mercurial cannot do), but because you need good branching, you chose Git? Commented Jul 29, 2011 at 14:26
  • 8
    I've never seen any convincing examples of how Git is better at merging than Mercurial, and certainly not in this answer. It's almost like you're confusing Hg with SVN or CVS. Commented Jul 29, 2011 at 14:37