Not really informative at all, but I liked this one. http://thebuild.com/blog/2009/11/04/git-vs-mercurial/
I've been trying to decide whether to use Git or Mercurial myself. I think I've decided to go with Mercurial for my work projects. It seems to have slightly better Windows support which I need for work. Also, since my company runs on an IBM i (AS/400) I can't seem to get Git working properly. I installed the AIX binaries, but I get an error saying: "git: can't find the terminal type xterm in the terminfo database". Anyway, they seem to be pretty equal to me. They both seem to have eclipse and Netbeans support. I personally liked that Mercurial has a "serve" option that makes it easy to share the repository. I've seen Git has something similar, but I wasn't able to get it to work on Windows. I didn't try too hard to make it work though. -- James R. Perkins On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 01:22, Michael Neale <[email protected]> wrote: > Nice find ! > > Yes they are both excellent. I assume hg is as easy to get going with > as git when you first install it? If so - go with either, you wont be > disappointed. > > For me, the killer feature was github - as I am lazy - and it kind of > holds my hand on how to do things (or did initially). I am sure there > are alternatives for hg as well. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
