From: Matt Todd <chiology@...>
Date: 2008-03-25T17:07:54+09:00
Subject: Re: Why git instead of mercurial?

I really don't think the internal implementation has that much
influence over the popularity of the chosen SCMs. I think it has more
to do with the fact that Git is the fastest (but not by much) and has
a greater deal of general use compared to Mercurial. Also, Git is
fairly low level, and I think that a good deal of the Ruby developers
out there want to have this amount of control over their repos.

Plus, honestly, using Git has improved my project work flow, albeit
subtly, by helping me focus on individual topics when changing code,
and providing me ways of organizing my code. Personally I have grown
to prefer the Git way of managing branches compared to Mercurial (hg
making a separate copy on the HD in a new folder, whereas in Git all
branches are managed in the same folder).

Plus, with GitHub.com now, it's hard to say no. Where's the hghub.com?

Matt



On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 1:52 AM, John Wells <lists@sourceillustrated.com> wrote:
> It seems like the hot new thing these days in Ruby-land is to host
>  your project in git. Cool....I'm very glad distributed vc is finally
>  getting the attention it deserves.
>
>  However, I'm curious...why are so many in the Ruby community flocking
>  to git instead of mercurial? It seems that Python/C would be a more
>  appealing choice than Perl/C...and given that they're largely
>  feature-identical. I'd appreciate any additional insight you might
>  provide.
>
>  Thanks!
>  John
>
>