On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Marco Schuster marco@harddisk.is-a-geek.org wrote:
Why doesn't Wikimedia switch to git for version control? It's way more powerful than svn...
git is completely unacceptable due to poor Windows support alone. (Writing large parts of it in bash was not a good portability move.) It also has the drawback that it would require careful thought on how to split up our current giant monolithic repo in a useful fashion; it's not quite clear to me how that might best be done.
Mercurial looks like a better option. It's what Mozilla chose, after some thought (and they had similar requirements to ours, although I assume their codebase is larger). It has cross-platform support; unfortunately, it seems not to allow partial checkouts either. It has the reputation of being significantly simpler than git.
Overall, I think we're okay for now, and we'd best let the dust settle before switching to some new-fangled RCS.