Future of Mercurial?

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

David Demelier <markand at malikania.fr> writes:

>> I've been stubbornly sticking with hg for hobby projects, but I almost never encounter anything other than git in the open source and commercial worlds. (I'm aware that hg is used in both, but this is a rare exception.) hg seems to be going very much in the direction of bzr, although we're clearly not there yet.
>
> It's not because everybody use Git that everyone else should have to do.
> There are still popular projects using Mercurial or even
> subversion/cvs/fossil. Git benefits from GitHub being unfortunately
> de-facto opensource hub. Not Mercurial's fault.

At work we’re using git, but it’s rare that a month goes by where I
don’t comment "this would be a no-brainer with hg", when someone loses
half an hour of work again to git.

So I still see a lot of options for hg, and for my own projects I stick
to it. For git projects I use either git (if they are big or use
subrepos or so security critical that I sign the commits) or hg-git (for
smaller repos).

Best wishes,
Arne
--
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1076 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20190312/c06c15c6/attachment.asc>