I'm in the same boat here. The only reason I use git is for github -- for work or collaborating with other people on something. And even then, unless I need branching, I'll still use Mercurial, through the hg-git plugin they provide[1].
Nothing against people who use git. If it works for you, use it. I don't like it because of its arcane incantations and tendency to let me destroy my work for the past few hours by using the wrong command. The features are great. But, not what I'm looking for in a DVCS. But, thats just me.
> [...] and tendency to let me destroy my work for the past few hours by using the wrong command.
I have the same misgivings about Mercurial. I guess it depends on what you are used to. Conceptually git and Mercurial are isomorphic. (See http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/GitConcepts for an explanation.)
While none of the popular DVCS's perfectly match my normal workflow, bazaar is usually the closest. i see the power of git, but i don't really need its particular power bits and i find both mercurial and bazaar easier to work with.
Just curious, how don't they match your workflow, and what about Git's power features gets in your way? You can just not use things like interactive rebase if you don't want.
I didnt say that git's power features get in my way. I said I don't need most of them and I find other DCVSs easier to work with. Git can fit in with my workflow just fine except for one thing... I find it overly complicated. I find fossil, bazaar and mercurial all easier to work with. And part of my workflow is 'not overly complicated'. For me, git is a constant battle to remember how to do things.
