Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Git vs Mercurial: What are the differences?
Git and Mercurial are both distributed version control systems (DVCS) that offer functionalities for managing source code. Here are the key differences between Git and Mercurial:
Architecture: Git uses a content-addressable filesystem, where each file is identified by its content hash, and commits are represented as directed acyclic graphs. On the other hand, Mercurial uses a simpler model with changesets that directly track changes to files. This architectural difference impacts how they handle branching, merging, and storage efficiency.
Performance: Git is known for its exceptional performance, especially when it comes to handling large repositories and performing operations like branching and merging. Mercurial, while still performant, may be slightly slower in certain operations due to its different architecture and algorithms.
Learning Curve: Git has a steeper learning curve compared to Mercurial. Git's command-line interface and terminology can be initially challenging for new users. Mercurial, on the other hand, aims for a simpler and more intuitive command set, making it more approachable for beginners or those transitioning from other version control systems.
Ecosystem and Adoption: Git has gained widespread adoption and has a larger ecosystem compared to Mercurial. It is the de facto standard for version control in many open-source projects and industry workflows. Git has an extensive collection of third-party tools, integrations, and hosting platforms like GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket. While Mercurial also has its ecosystem and hosting platforms like Bitbucket, it has a smaller community and user base overall.
Windows Compatibility: Git has native support for Windows, making it a popular choice for developers working in Windows environments. Mercurial also supports Windows, but historically, Git has provided better compatibility and performance on this platform.
In summary, Git's widespread adoption and robust tooling make it a popular choice for many developers, while Mercurial's simpler command set and intuitive design may appeal to beginners or those looking for an alternative version control system.
SVN is much simpler than git for the simple stuff (checking in files and updating them when everyone's online), and much more complex than git for the complicated stuff (branching and merging). Or put another way, git's learning curve is steep up front, and then increases moderately as you do weird things; SVN's learning curve is very shallow up front and then increases rapidly.
If you're storing large files, if you're not branching, if you're not storing source code, and if your team is happy with SVN and the workflow you have, I'd say you should stay on SVN.
If you're writing source code with a relatively modern development practice (developers doing local builds and tests, pre-commit code reviews, preferably automated testing, preferably some amount of open-source code), you should move to git for two reasons: first, this style of working inherently requires frequent branching and merging, and second, your ability to interact with outside projects is easier if you're all comfortable with git instead of snapshotting the outside project into SVN.
Pros of Git
- Distributed version control system1.4K
- Efficient branching and merging1.1K
- Fast959
- Open source845
- Better than svn726
- Great command-line application368
- Simple306
- Free291
- Easy to use232
- Does not require server222
- Distributed27
- Small & Fast22
- Feature based workflow18
- Staging Area15
- Most wide-spread VSC13
- Role-based codelines11
- Disposable Experimentation11
- Frictionless Context Switching7
- Data Assurance6
- Efficient5
- Just awesome4
- Github integration3
- Easy branching and merging3
- Compatible2
- Flexible2
- Possible to lose history and commits2
- Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing1
- Light1
- Team Integration1
- Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system1
- Easy1
- Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast1
- CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome1
- It's what you do1
- Phinx0
Pros of Mercurial
- A lot easier to extend than git18
- Easy-to-grasp system with nice tools17
- Works on windows natively without cygwin nonsense13
- Written in python11
- Free9
- Fast8
- Better than Git6
- Best GUI6
- Better than svn4
- Hg inc2
- Good user experience2
- TortoiseHg - Unified free gui for all platforms2
- Consistent UI2
- Easy-to-use2
- Native support to all platforms2
- Free to use1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Git
- Hard to learn16
- Inconsistent command line interface11
- Easy to lose uncommitted work9
- Worst documentation ever possibly made8
- Awful merge handling5
- Unexistent preventive security flows3
- Rebase hell3
- Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly2
- When --force is disabled, cannot rebase2
- Doesn't scale for big data1
Cons of Mercurial
- Track single upstream only0
- Does not distinguish between local and remote head0
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Git?
What is Mercurial?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use Mercurial?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Git?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+7
+9
+4
+2
+3
+4
+5
+22