Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Sergiu Dotenco (sergiu.dotenco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-19 10:48:13
On 19.03.2012 15:02, Daryle Walker wrote:
> Git has a competitor called Mercurial? If we're moving to a Distributed-VCS, should we go to Mercurial instead of Git? They're kind-of like CVS vs. Subversion, except I think they came up in parallel. (While Subversion was designed as an updated CVS.) I think Git was made up of a bunch of script hacks, while Mercurial was a regimented single program.
> I don't have a preference, but I want to make sure we consider the rival options.
> Daryle W.
While we're at it, Google's analysis of Git and Mercurial shouldn't be
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk