
Why git is better than X - ptarjan
http://whygitisbetterthanx.com/
======
davidw
I more or less settled on git, but I think he's being glib with some of these
points. For instance 'easy to use': many git commands require --funky
'options' -t -o get the desired results, whereas that's rarer with svn and
systems that have taken that approach.

~~~
charlesmarshall
the majority of commands you use (clone, pull, push, branch, add) dont require
many options at all .. -a -m -b ..

Of course if you're doing something elaborate then you will get some random
options like -soft or --before="yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm" .. those are generally
things you can't do in svn ..

edit: I forgot to mention that good guis like gitx do most of these things for
you

~~~
InclinedPlane
This would be vastly improved if Git's documentation and help system wasn't so
incomplete, out of date, convoluted, and messy. Git has an incredibly rich
featureset, but the documentation often falls down in highlighting the 99% use
cases so it ends up with a steeper learning curve than many other SCMs. I
think this is one reason why Mercurial is so popular, at the scale of most
development projects the advantages of Git over Mercurial are not terribly
significant, but Mercurial has much, much better help and tutorials.

------
philjackson
Github - really? I just can't imagine Github being _nearly_ as important to
git adoption as some of those other points. It's a slow, clunky interface to a
fast VCS.

------
tome
Has darcs just disappeared off the radar? I'm using it for all my projects,
though I'm not sharing wih anyone else, so I've never come under pressure to
switch.

------
jeroen
There is some interesting discussion here:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=381920>

------
caddr
My take from that chart is that if git was actually easy to use, it would be
as good as svn. whoopee!

