"Trass3r" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:op.vwu1q2lv3ncmek@enigma... > Am 10.06.2011, 13:48 Uhr, schrieb Robert Clipsham > <[email protected]>: >> You're probably better off for it - I used to be strongly in the >> mercurial camp, but having used git for a while I find I vastly prefer >> it, despite still not knowing how to do quite a bit with it. > > Yep, Mercurial's biggest drawback imo is that bookmarks (which let you do > something analogous to git's branches) aren't standard and thus aren't > pushed/pulled by default.
Isn't cloning a sufficient equivalent to git's branches? > And of course github is way better than bitbucket, but that's not > Mercurial's fault I admit. Totally agree. Not that I'm big fan of GitHub, but yea, definitely better than BitBucket.
