News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why I Switched to Git From Mercurial by pacemkr on Monday May 17, 2010 @11:49AM (#1354599)
"It's just an interface, though, and this is a tool you are going to use every day..."

This summarized, for me, why I use hg. It is a tool I am going to use everyday and it's not ok for this tool to have a crappy interface. My hard drive space, that I don't care about.

Re:Why I Switched to Git From Mercurial by garybernhardt on Monday May 17, 2010 @12:21PM (#1354689)
Did you read the end? ;)

""" I'm sorry for recommending software with a confusing interface. But you'll be spending a lot of time with it; it's worth getting over the initial hurdle of confusion. """

Note that I call it the "initial hurdle". I know both systems very well, and Mercurial gets in my way far, far more than Git.

Re:Why I Switched to Git From Mercurial by j_baker on Monday May 17, 2010 @03:05PM (#1355203)
git's interface isn't terribly intuitive, but it isn't that bad. Once you get the hang of it, it makes sense.
Re:Why I Switched to Git From Mercurial by anthonyb on Monday May 17, 2010 @08:24PM (#1356030)
I really don't follow this argument. git's interface is a giant turd. I've been using it for months, and it still hasn't stuck, no matter what tutorials I read. The normal workflow needs far too many commands and special options, local vs. remote branching seems to do weird things, and the error messages are completely obtuse.
Re:Why I Switched to Git From Mercurial by charlesmarshall on Monday May 17, 2010 @12:25PM (#1354703)
not all guis are made equal, depends which is being used to how good or bad it is. I use gitx on osx (http://gitx.frim.nl/), other than the lack of a 'push' button its spot on, simple to use and powerful.
Re:Why I Switched to Git From Mercurial by njharman on Monday May 17, 2010 @04:31PM (#1355436)
Yeah, I too thought the logic of that statement was completely back asswords.