On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 09:29:42PM -0600, Richard Esplin wrote: > You should have to do them in Git, because Git is Wesley Snipes: > > http://www.ericsink.com/entries/hg_denzel.html
My take on Git vs. Mercurial is that they're both respectable tools, and although we will each necessarily pick a favorite, we should be comfortable with both. They are both very mature, and it seems that they will coexist for a long time. CVS and SVN are on the way out, but like zombies, they might not ever quite die. In any case, we Mercurial and Git users should be working together to bring in our unfortunate friends who are still using Subversion (or even worse, no version control at all). :) The classic complaints from one side or the other that "Git is hard to use" or "Mercurial is slow" aren't true anymore, and over time the two systems are slowly converging. I have my list of reasons for preferring Git, but I'm still happy for someone if they decide that they prefer Mercurial. > (I'm a Mercurial fanboy by the way.) I'm happy to hear it. Keep up the good fight. :) -- Andrew McNabb http://www.mcnabbs.org/andrew/ PGP Fingerprint: 8A17 B57C 6879 1863 DE55 8012 AB4D 6098 8826 6868 -------------------- BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ The opinions expressed in this message are the responsibility of their author. They are not endorsed by BYU, the BYU CS Department or BYU-UUG. ___________________________________________________________________ List Info (unsubscribe here): http://uug.byu.edu/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
