Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?
From: Hartmut Kaiser (hartmut.kaiser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-19 15:31:03

Next message: Thomas Klimpel: "[boost] Java bindings for boost (was RE: [git] Mercurial?)"
Previous message: Hartmut Kaiser: "Re: [boost] [git] What's the IDE picture like?"
In reply to: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?"
Next in thread: Thomas Klimpel: "[boost] Java bindings for boost (was RE: [git] Mercurial?)"
Reply: Thomas Klimpel: "[boost] Java bindings for boost (was RE: [git] Mercurial?)"
Reply: Mathias Gaunard: "Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?"
Reply: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?"

> on Mon Mar 19 2012, Daryle Walker <darylew-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Git has a competitor called Mercurial? If we're moving to a
> > Distributed-VCS, should we go to Mercurial instead of Git?
>
> IMO, no. There are several reasons, but the main one is that Git is
> winning in the marketplace.

You're kidding right? If not - let's switch Boost to Java - it's way more
popular!

Regards Hartmut
---------------
http://boost-spirit.com
http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu

Next message: Thomas Klimpel: "[boost] Java bindings for boost (was RE: [git] Mercurial?)"
Previous message: Hartmut Kaiser: "Re: [boost] [git] What's the IDE picture like?"
In reply to: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?"
Next in thread: Thomas Klimpel: "[boost] Java bindings for boost (was RE: [git] Mercurial?)"
Reply: Thomas Klimpel: "[boost] Java bindings for boost (was RE: [git] Mercurial?)"
Reply: Mathias Gaunard: "Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?"
Reply: Dave Abrahams: "Re: [boost] [git] Mercurial?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk