Mercurial popularity is stagnant

[Augie Fackler]

On Jun 30, 2014, at 1:35 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc at bbs.darktech.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'd like to bring your attention to:
> http://www.google.ca/trends/explore?hl=en-US&q=mercurial,+git,+github,+bitbucket&cmpt=q&content=1 
> 
> It seems to me that GitHub is directly responsible for Git's popularity
> skyrocketing in 2009. By comparison, Mercurial's popularity seems to be
> stagnant for a while. Bitbucket initially did a decent job, but ever since
> they got bought out by Atlassian all public announcements emphasize Git
> support and don't mention Mercurial at all.
> 
> Case in point:
> http://blog.bitbucket.org/2012/12/10/feature-branches-just-got-better/
> 
> How do we go about reversing this trend?

I think one thing that would help would be users blogging more about their workflows and how hg makes them productive. I keep meaning to do this, but I have too many things pulling at my attention to ever manage to get started.

> 
> Gili
> 
> 
> 
> --
> View this message in context: http://mercurial.808500.n3.nabble.com/Mercurial-popularity-is-stagnant-tp4011549.html
> Sent from the General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20140701/e5c53fbc/attachment.asc>