On 4/28/10, dak180 wrote: > On Apr 28, 2010, at 2:58 AM, Per Inge Mathisen wrote: > > > That leaves only > > the question of whether git is good/user-friendly enough on > > Windows/Mac. > > For a number of reasons I would prefer mercurial, of which I think the most > important is that the mac gui for git has not been worked on since last oct. > where as the one for mercurial had a new release within the last two weeks. >
My personal experience shows me that git is too unstable on windows. The other issue with git is that it requires cygwin or MSYS, which are both pretty crappy. Sure, you can hide the shell with tortoisegit, but it still is too unstable. Hg is much better supported, since it isn't as hacky as git is on windows. Bzr is also not bad, and is a bit more polished that Hg on windows. While svn is showing its age, the main issue is with the server is it not ? We could switch to the beta SVN server, (then locally, you can use git-svn or hgsvn or bzr-svn for commits) but I just don't have the bandwidth to upload a 1.4GB+ repo without it being down for quite a few days. Yes, SF allows us to use git or hg as well, but I am unsure if this will fix the main issue or not. If the problem is that the (old) SVN server is overloaded, or if it is a connection issue of some kind. Which could mean, switching to another host again. _______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
