Re: preferring mercurial

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Nathan Trapuzzano writes:

 > "Git got branches right, Mercurial (and Bazaar, etc.) didn't".
 > This essay describes the difference well:
 > 
 > http://xentac.net/2012/01/19/the-real-difference-between-git-and-mercurial.html

Except that this blog fails to mention bookmarks and the rev query
language, like I did earlier in this thread.  The combination of those
two changes the game quite a bit I suspect.

I still like git's open data structures compared to Mercurial's
revlogs (for example, it's not obvious what happens if you rollback a
bookmarked commit), but once you have proper refs and a query
language, it should be possible to do most of the things git does as
git does them.