Skip to main content
Post Made Community Wiki by jammycakes

Git has more functionality than Mercurial. For example, there is no Mercurial equivalent to Git's rebase. Whether that functionality is good or dangerous is in holy-war territory.

But to answer your question, I think it's as simple as this: Mercurial has a more familiar syntax (particularly for SVN users) and is fairly well documented. Once you get used to the Git syntax, you'll find it as easy to use as anything else.

Git has more functionality than Mercurial. For example, there is no Mercurial equivalent to Git's rebase. Whether that functionality is good or dangerous is in holy-war territory.

But to answer your question, I think it's as simple as this: Mercurial has a more familiar syntax (particularly for SVN users) and is fairly well documented. Once you get used to the Git syntax, you'll find it as easy to use as anything else.

I think it's as simple as this: Mercurial has a more familiar syntax (particularly for SVN users) and is fairly well documented. Once you get used to the Git syntax, you'll find it as easy to use as anything else.

Source Link
pdr
  • 53.8k
  • 14
  • 139
  • 225

Git has more functionality than Mercurial. For example, there is no Mercurial equivalent to Git's rebase. Whether that functionality is good or dangerous is in holy-war territory.

But to answer your question, I think it's as simple as this: Mercurial has a more familiar syntax (particularly for SVN users) and is fairly well documented. Once you get used to the Git syntax, you'll find it as easy to use as anything else.