Mercurial

(28)
4.2 out of 5 stars

Mercurial is a free, distributed source control management tool. It efficiently handles projects of any size and offers an easy and intuitive interface.

Work for Mercurial?

Learning about Mercurial?

We can help you find the solution that fits you best.

Find the Right Product

Mercurial Reviews

Write a Review
Filter Reviews
Filter Reviews
  • Ratings
  • Company Size
  • User Role
  • Industry
Ratings
Company Size
User Role
Industry
Showing 28 Mercurial reviews
LinkedIn Connections
Mercurial review by Janaka B.
Janaka B.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Simplified version control"

What do you like best?

Quite easy for beginners to get hands-on experience with version control

Extension system for incrementally enabling advanced features

Most commands are simpler than corresponding equivalents in Git etc

Ability to run local Mercurial servers for demonstration/syncing purposes

What do you dislike?

Lack of support for some advanced features like --depth support in cloning

Inability to discard closed branches

Lack of in-built pagination support for long outputs (e.g. commit log, unlike in Git)

Inability to maintain staged changes while making further modifications (e.g. Git allows a file to be added to the commit stage and further changes to be made, the latter not being automatically added to the stage)

Recommendations to others considering the product

If you are looking forward to incorporating advanced features like branch cleanup, symlinks or shallow clones in the future, reconsider Git instead; if you are pretty sure that you wouldn't need such, then Mercurial is a really good and convenient choice!

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Versioning source code of internal and client projects

Ability to version-control our sources with less hassle and more productivity

Sign in to G2 Crowd to see what your connections have to say about Mercurial
Mercurial review by Rory D.
Rory D.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Use daily for managing main company codebase"

What do you like best?

Mercurial has all the features of a good distributed revision control system. Not only is it incredibly useful as a collaboration tool, I find the ability to track changes and rollback to a specific revision invaluable for working by myself too. Mercurial lets you easily see, down to each line of code, when it was first introduced and why, and tools like hg bisect make tracking down bugs much faster. There are many good graphical frontends such as TortoiseHg and SourceTree that make using Mercurial easier, as well as integration with most popular IDEs such as Visual Studio, Eclipse and IntelliJ.

What do you dislike?

The biggest issue we've had with Mercurial is the lack of a built-in system for file locking, which is a necessity when working with large binary files that can't be merged. Because of this we still use Perforce for some projects, although there doesn't seem to be any other distributed version control system that handles this issue as it's inherent in the distributed model, which in turn brings many benefits.

Recently Mercurial seems to be falling by the wayside in terms of support compared to git, which has a very similar feature set. This is probably just due to the popularity of GitHub, but the trend in external tools, editors and IDEs seems to be to support git first.

Performance in handling large files is still subpar when compared to Perforce, although again this may be an underlying architectural issue to do with the distributed vs centralised model. Overall performance is still very good.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Honestly its feature set at this point is so similar to git that I don't see any reason to switch if you're already using that. Starting a new project or coming from another system such as SVN, it is definitely worth considering, and there are scripts to convert repositories from SVN, git and most other popular services while retaining full history.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

At my work we have dozens of Mercurial repositories for most of our code projects that aren't using git. It has become an essential part of our workflow working and collaborating with each other. We also use Jenkins CI and have a server set up to monitor several repositories for changes, which can automatically trigger builds and unit test runs.

What Version Control Systems solution do you use?

Thanks for letting us know!
Mercurial review by Elifarley C.
Elifarley C.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Powerful yet easier to use and administer than Git"

What do you like best?

Ease-of-use when performing operations like branching, merging, rebasing, reverting file changes, stripping commits, access control to files and branches based on user names and groups.

Besides that, it's very well written (in Python), modular, and easy to extend / modify.

What do you dislike?

Not as wildly known as Git, and even though it has support for git-based repositories as well, it's got some rough edges at that.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Don't be afraid to use Mercurial just because it was not created by Linus Torvalds!

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We needed to have easier control over branching and merging operations, and we also needed better user access control to files and branches.

Mercurial review by Andrew L.
Andrew L.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Great for personal projects"

What do you like best?

I like how simple the commands are compared to git. It's a distributed version control software, so it gives you that power. When git is too confusing or overkill, mercurial is very nice. Mercurial also has measures in place that prevent you from shooting yourself in the foot.

What do you dislike?

With such wide adoption of git, mercurial can begin to lag behind on some of its plugins, especially those that allow interoperability with different repos. If you're using mercurial just as-is with it's own repos, you should enjoy it quite well. The way you use mercurial differs from how you'd use git by subtle means, so it's a bit tricky to grasp at first.

Recommendations to others considering the product

If you're not good at git, but want to get off of SVN and don't want to invest so much time in learning it, try mercurial. I think it's a great tool. I just both git and mercurial interchangeably

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

I use it for my personal projects, and those with small developers working on it simultaneously. I'd imagine it'd scale well, as Facebook is using it for massive things. But I only use it with that. The benefits is the simplicity, WAY easier to use than git.

Mercurial review by Christophe M.
Christophe M.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Mercurial is a powerful, portable, and easy to use distrubuted version control system"

What do you like best?

Mercurial is an Open Source very powerful DVCS. It is at the level of Git but with a much simpler user interface and one which provides a smooth transition from a centralized system like Subversion to a DVCS. It is written in Python and is thus portable: Linux but also MacOS, Windows are fully supported.

What I most like in Mercurial is its very gradual learning curve: even if you are not a version control specialist you can easily set it up for personal or group usage.

However, you can also add powerful extensions: rebase, transplant, bisect, large files, etc. You can use the phase mechanism to decide whether it is safe or not to allow history rewriting, you can install and use TortoiseHg, a very intuitive portable GUI, etc.

Also, a service such as bitbucket provides a web service to collaborate with your friends or colleagues on code with pull requests, as they have been popularized by Github.

What do you dislike?

What I dislike most in Mercurial is that.. it is not more widely use!

Git is becoming very popular, even in companies previously using Subversion, Perforce, or Teamwork. People know git commands and so have difficulties with mercurial differences in: branches philosophy (Mercurial branches are more long-lived, while lightweight branches like in Git are similar to bookmarks in Mercurial), fetch/pull commands which are opposed in Mercurial and Git, etc. If you are heavily using both, like I do, you need to think twice before pulling or fetching! And even more when undoing mistakes, or you run the risk of loosing data.

Besides this lack of popularity which sometimes makes it difficult to work with others, Mercurial does not really have shortcomings in my honest opinion.. It "just works"!

Recommendations to others considering the product

I very recommend the use of Mercurial, one of the most powerful and easy to use DVCS currently available.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Version Control is a service of paramount importance for any software producing work: being able to merge and revert changes, work together, review changes, find bugs with bisect, etc. With web services such as Bitbucket you can in addition collaborate with other developers worldwide.

Mercurial review by Eric M.
Eric M.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Used as a primary DVCS to replace Subversion"

What do you like best?

Unlike similar tools (Git), Mercurial is incredibly easy to use and polished. It gives you the benefit of running a _distributed_ version control system without the hassle of needing to be a command line expert. On Mac, both I and the team used the command line frequently, but we learned on Windows with an amazing GUI client (Tortoise).

What do you dislike?

The hosting options for community Mercurial projects aren't as polished as those for Git. Everyone knows (and likely uses) GitHub. Mercurial is limited to self-hosting or less-polished tools like BitBucket or (soon to be defunct) Google Code.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Also learn at least one other VCS, distributed or otherwise. Git is a great comparison because it aims to solve the same problems as Mercurial (only in a different fashion). Subversion and Team Foundation are great centralized VCS projects that help illustrate the key differences between the centralized and distributed workflows.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

We had multiple developers working on a single, legacy codebase who would frequently step on one another's changes in a centralized VCS. Mercurial helped us quickly ramp up with a distributed workflow without the learning curve required for more granular (read: command line-based) tools.

Mercurial review by Alexander R.
Alexander R.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"The best version control system out there"

What do you like best?

* powerful branching model (named branches, bookmarks)

* straightforward conceptual model and philosophy, especially compared to Git

* simple and intuitive command-line interface – modular commands and easy-to-discover new features

* understandable and concise documentation (help command, man page)

* easy to learn and properly understand, for above reasons

* excellent hg-git bridge that allows pulling and pushing to Git repositories easily, as if they were Hg repositories (e.g. GitHub)

* helpful IRC channel and generally friendly user base

What do you dislike?

* extension framework requires knowledge of Python

* harder to find developers who are comfortable with it – despite it being the easiest and most comfortable-to-use VCS in my experience, people default to Git & GitHub, where all the hype has been in recent years

Recommendations to others considering the product

Mercurial simply feels natural to use, and does everything you'd ever want it to do. Don't just use Git because it's cool and popular – Mercurial is equally powerful, just as fast for most things, and without a lot of the pains of Git.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Mercurial solves in a simple and intuitive manner the standard problem of multiple persons working on the same set of files (usually source code) in a flexible and distributed way.

Mercurial review by Cesar I.
Cesar I.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Mercurial is a great source control manager"

What do you like best?

Mercurial is a very simple but powerful distributed source control manager. The most powerful feature is extensibility. There are tons of extensions and it's easy to write a new one, as Mercurial is written in python, a simple script can go a very long way. MQ (Mercurial queues) are a great way to keep work in progress. The command line makes a lot of sense and commands are very intuitive. There are great UI tools and it integrates with lots of software including the most popular IDEs.

What do you dislike?

Mercurial and git are really similar, but I think git got the branching process right from the beginning. Mercurial introduced bookmarks that work like git branches, but their use is not as polished as with git. In some sense MQ (Mercurial queues) solve many of the shortcomings of branches.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Start with a hosted repo (like BitBucket), and then if you feel confident and you see the need, you can have your own hosted instance.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Source control management is central to software development and using the right tool makes a huge difference. Mercurial, along with git, are the best tools for versioning your code.

Mercurial review by Reece H.
Reece H.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Easy and powerful source code management"

What do you like best?

In Mercurial common use cases are easy, more esoteric ones are possible, and the interface is a delight. Error messages are typically lucid. Command line help is useful, as are man pages and online tutorials. Mercurial is well-designed tool with a coherent user experience. (For the record, I have also used git extensively. Mercurial is much like git, but with fewer surprises and inscrutable messages.)

What do you dislike?

The worst part of mercurial actually has nothing to do with mercurial per se: mercurial lacks an ecosystem of well-integrated services. The best option is bitbucket.org, but in many respects that pales in comparison to github. This leads to an unfortunate dilemma: The coder's experience is much better with mercurial than git, but the github community and ecosystem of tools are vastly superior to those of bitbucket.

It is possible use github with mercurial via the hg-git plugin. This works well, including with bookmarks/branches and merges, and I use this strategy for github-hosted repos.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Upshot: In my opinion, the superior SCM tool is mercurial, but the better overall practical choice for many organizations may be git.

The choice of SCM -- mercurial, git, or others -- should be made in the context of an overall strategy for continuous integration, continuous deployment, packaging, documentation, and in-house experience. For many organizations, it's likely that those needs are better met with github than with any other hosting platform for any SCM tool (as of late 2015). Largely because of github's success, more coders use git and candidate employees are more likely to have experience with it. These points recommend in favor of git. Adventurous geeks can have their cake and eat it too by using mercurial with the hg-git plugin.

Bitbucket with native mercurial repos is a close second. This is a particularly good choice for users who want free private repos (which are not available on github). I have used for bitbucket and mercurial for years, including with bitbucket issue tracking and external integrations for CI testing and documentation.

I have used git extensively, but I stay with mercurial for two reasons: I prefer its pragmatic interface and I can't live without tortoise hg, a first-rate source code GUI that enables a visualization of the code graph, pairwise diffs, and more. (There's nothing comparable for git on linux.) Despite that, I seriously consider moving code to github and using hg-git to avail myself of the more robust ecosystem.

Finally, if you're still considering git, check out http://www.xkcd.com/1597/ and http://git-man-page-generator.lokaltog.net/. They wouldn't be funny if they weren't so true.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

I use mercurial for source code management, in 3 organizations on bitbucket (with native mercurial repos) and 2 organizations on github (via the hg-git plugin for mercurial).

Mercurial review by Chris T.
Chris T.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Very nice distributed version control system"

What do you like best?

The Mercurial team has paid close attention to what has worked with competing packages in the past from a user interface perspective. Thus the learning curve is minimized so you can learn the tool separately from learning the internals of distributed version control management. In general, the user experience is very good, and if you know SVN you can get started right away, learning as you go. For this reason, even though I use git at some customer's locations, I use git or svn, Mercurial is my own tool of choice.

What do you dislike?

Compared to git there are two things that Mercurial doesn't do as well. The first is that it is far more conservative about letting you switch heads with uncommitted changes (git will only abort if there is a conflict, but mercurial will only let you if it is a new head). In my view this is probably he most serious wart with Merurial in the user experience. The work around is to create a new head, commit, and graft or similar.

Also Mercurial does not currently have a way to flag files like a changelog for union merge though this is forthcoming. This results in needless conflicts requiring one to specify a union merge manually.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Keep in mind a "branch" is like an svn branch but a bookmark is like a git bookmark.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

I started using Mercurial because I needed to be able to work on multiple branches of what was then an SVN tree while off, merging commits between changes at a time when I had somewhat unreliable internet. Mercurial allowed me to do this well and allowed me to focus on my development work instead of my tools.

Mercurial review by Domenico T.
Domenico T.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Distributed version control with some regrets"

What do you like best?

Mercurial HG is what is called a distributed version control system (DVCS) that let you develop a repository completely offline. Basically when you clone a repository the full revision history is copied locally and you're enabled to add your own commits, even if your collaborators are working on their own clones.

It has a syntax that is easier to remember compared to git and works flawlessly on all the major platforms.

What do you dislike?

We adopted mercurial in our organization when there was no git support for windows users.

There are two things that I miss as a mercurial user:

- cheap branching

- support for collaboration services like github (there is Bitbucket from atlassian but I really like the fork-pull request model)

If I should take a decision today I would totally go with git.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Please consider your collaboration workflow before adopting mercurial or any other DVCS.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

For me, the main use of mercurial is to manage source code repositories.

But I found it useful for my dotfiles (common configuration files that I copy on my machines) and for markdown documents also.

Mercurial review by Paulo C.
Paulo C.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Neat tool for control version"

What do you like best?

- Easy to use

- Works as it should :D

- Widely supported (Although not as much as git)

- Good Desktop UIs available (TortoiseHg, etc)

- Good Web UIs available (Bitbucket, etc)

What do you dislike?

- CLI commands are equivalent, but not the same as Git, SVN, etc.

- Not as popular as Git, therefore not supported by Github, Gitlab and others

Recommendations to others considering the product

If you are getting started and prefer using an UI, I suggest tortoiseHg

If you are working with a huge repository, try HgwatchmanExtension

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

- Store source files in a centralized repository

- Code reviews before changes are merged

- Everyone can work on their on copies of the repository at the same time

Mercurial review by Ramón L.
Ramón L.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"The version control tool that will save your life"

What do you like best?

Mercurial is a really nice alternative to git. It's simple, beautiful and does what you need. It works for large projects too and it's easy to learn. You can just set a meeting with your team, show them some commands and the rest of the learning will be almost automatic.

What do you dislike?

It lacks the global support git has. And not a lot of hosting providers will offer support. It won't be woth it if you are using git in a large number of apps, migration is not worth it.

Recommendations to others considering the product

I truly recommend to check all of it's features and plan for a long term use if that's the case. If you don't feel you will be using it like you would be using git then don't bother implementing it as a solution. Just use it until you feel confidence.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Version control mostly. We are still playing with it and analyzing if we can move to a more serious implementation

Mercurial review by Allan L.
Allan L.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"ideal for fast branchy development for small and large teams"

What do you like best?

the branching model is better than Git's, cross branch merges and cherrypicks/grafts seem to be handled better aswell

What do you dislike?

since Mercurial releases new versions so often (good), most of the plugins for older versions do not work (bad). This is really a non-issue, because most of the times the features I used from plugins show up in the new Mercurial core.

Recommendations to others considering the product

while git skills are definately a must in this market, Mercurial offers better ease of use especially for beginners: the learning curve of Mercurial is easier than Git. Things just work in Mercurial like you would expect them to work

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

mainly web development

Mercurial review by Phil w.
Phil w.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Maybe the easier decentralized version control system"

What do you like best?

Mercurial seemed to be a good trade off between flexibility and complexity.

I discovered hg (mercurial chemical symbol) at the same time as git, although I was becoming to feel comfortable with git, I recognized that its learning curve was a bit too expensive for any users.

The other important thing is that there are many conversions tools from or to git , so if you decide to use hg today you wont be stuck for in it forever, you can convert repo to git and virtually to any other, ever downgrade to subversion using those tools.

What do you dislike?

Well I think git is getting more popular than hg, so I wont dare to use both, I switched most of my trees to git. I think I wil remain a git user because of it's community. maybe it could make sense to "emulate" hg client on a git backend for connecting both worlds ?

Recommendations to others considering the product

Try to create your own repo to manage your notes or files (ie /etc) and learn your owm.

Or look for existing projects how they are using it (mozilla or emacs IIRC)

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Cooperation model setup easily without IT support, is perfect for R&D or short projects. It still think that it worth to be considered for users who are confused by git and used to subversion, Of course CVS users will see many improvement in using hg.

Mercurial review by User
User
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"I enjoy it very much."

What do you like best?

It's simple, while powerful.

I tried git, it's too complex. I don't like complex things, keep simple, focus on own work, and do it the best.

I believe mercurial have done her work good.

Maybe because the feature set I'm using is limited. I should explore more. For now, well, it works!

What do you dislike?

No. Lots of project is managed with git, I can not use mercurial. If that is a problem, yes, I do not like this.

So maybe we could have some convert stuff, make it possible to manage git project with mercurial.

Yes, we need better GUI tool. Tools like mercurial is for managing work, better UI makes it easier.

Recommendations to others considering the product

This is what you think you want.

Mercurial may offer more, but you do not need learn that part when you start off. So if you want try it, try it now.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Networking related software. In fact I do not benefits much from it. I just need keep track of my work.

Mercurial review by User in Information Technology and Services
User in Information Technology and Services
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Reasonable feature set that enables alternate workflows"

What do you like best?

Like most source code control systems, Mercurial tries to force a particular methodology on its users for no good reason. However, the underlying system is sufficiently powerful and there are enough extensions available that it's possible to work around this bias. The "every repo can be a server" capability is also very important.

What do you dislike?

Reliability is barely acceptable - it's much too easy to get a repo into an unusable state (and no extension are required for this to happen). Recovering from incorrect operations is much too difficult - unlimited rollback should be possible.

Recommendations to others considering the product

Make sure it matches your development process

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Source code maintenance.

Mercurial review by User in Aviation & Aerospace
User in Aviation & Aerospace
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Useable git alternative."

What do you like best?

I liked it's ease of use best. If you often find yourself wondering about how to do things with git, mercurial is for you. It offers much less functionality - and that is a good thing.

What do you dislike?

Sometimes you need the extra power of git, and you have to use some workarounds or hacks to get your stuff done with hg. This does not happen very often, but when it does, the documentation is not very good, so you have a better chance with Google and Stackoverflow.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Obviously, to track changes to the codebase. It's easy to use, so new people get up to speed faster than with git or other version control tools.

Mercurial review by User in Computer Software
User in Computer Software
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Solid and simple version control"

What do you like best?

It's fairly powerful but simple to use. It has a lot of the same concepts and functionality as git but with much less of a learning curve. Also, "hg incoming" and "hg outgoing" are really useful. And so are extensions like hg record and hg shelve.

What do you dislike?

It's less powerful than git and I like git's branches more than mercurial's branches/bookmark system. I think git's harder learning curve is worth it due to the wealth of features git has, and even though mercurial is good for getting devs up to speed quickly, I prefer using git whenever possible.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

I used Mercurial at a previous job at an analytics startup for version control until we switched to git. It worked really well for us for several years until we needed something more powerful.

Mercurial review by Alan J.
Alan J.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"So much easier than Git, but so less community using it."

What do you like best?

It is easy. If you used to SVN, most of it is the same but more powerfull. If you used GIT, it is the same, but easier to use.

What do you dislike?

No Github. Github needs GIT or SVN. You can install a plugin to interact with GIT, but is was easier to just learn GIT last time I tried.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Code offline then merge with main version. With multiple people. All offline. Then sync when online.

Mercurial review by Keith G.
Keith G.
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"A solid DVCS; the core of our "

What do you like best?

It's reliable. It's flexible. It's easy to learn the basics. It's supported on many platforms: Windows, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, and Linux.

What do you dislike?

I would really like to have a simple solution for shared- and/or sub-repositories. Mercurial has ways to support both, but neither is easy to use or transparent.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Corporate-wide, distributed version control for software projects.

Mercurial review by Charles A.
Charles A.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"It's not git, and there's nothing wrong with that"

What do you like best?

Mercurial is basically equivalent to git, IMO. I liked the support for Windows back when I was doing development on Windows for Windows users. Using git's terminology, I found I could do what I needed to do using only the "porcelain" without resorting to "plumbing" commands.

What do you dislike?

The biggest complaint I hear from people is that Mercurial isn't git. Unfortunately, they both use some common terms for very different concepts. So, if you learned git first, Mercurial is confusing at first. I learned Mercurial first, so git was confusing at first.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Version control.

Mercurial review by <span ue="safe-name" data-safe-name-id="9efde078-241b-4080-aceb-57a5ca8c5674">Andrei D.</span>
Andrei D.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source
" itemprop="name" />

"Best Open Source distributed version control available"

What do you like best?

* Carefully thought-out command-line interface (no checkout -b vs branch)

* Extensibility (there's an extension for absolute most tasks you might need)

* Builtin manual completeness

* Lack of sophisticated conventions (unlike Git's "branch" definition)

What do you dislike?

There's much less tools that support Mercurial, but major ones do which seems to be quite enough.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Mercurial is a solution to hassle-free distributed source code revision control.

Mercurial review by User
User
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Very usefull revision-control tool for dev"

What do you like best?

The like that this revision-control tool is distribuited. So you can commit on your local system the changes that you make and when everything is done you can push the changes on a remote system.

What do you dislike?

I dislike the native tool of merging differences in hg workbench(the ufficial tool of this sw).

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

This software allows us to work in team.

Mercurial review by Esha M.
Esha M.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Review of Mercurial"

What do you like best?

I can access the repository without internet access.

What do you dislike?

When I clone a repository, the whole repository gets cloned, only if I needed parts of it

Takes too long to clone

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Working with a lot of different people on the same project is made easier with mercurial. We can keep track of what was done when, we we can retrack if anything goes wrong.

Mercurial review by Administrator in Internet
Administrator in Internet
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Mercurial is easy, flexible and reliable."

What do you like best?

Mercurial is very powerful distributed VCS with very simple branching model. It is excellent for small projects with relatively short history as well as awesome for big enterprise level projects.

One more "feature" of mercurial is it's mercurial-server - very simple and reliable way to organise private repository server.

What do you dislike?

Sometimes configuring of Mercurial extensions could be annoying.

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Organising private enterprise-level VCS server in minutes. Easy to configure. Flexible permissions management model. Easy to establish backup mechanism.

Mercurial review by Patrick D.
Patrick D.
Validated Reviewer
Review Source

"Hg may not get a fair shake"

What do you like best?

It is easy to learn and has good version control tools.

What do you dislike?

I hear git has better, but I haven't come across items wishing hg was like git

Recommendations to others considering the product

Give it a chance before jumping to git

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

Code stability. Makes it quick and efficient to share and improve code.

Mercurial review by User in Financial Services
User in Financial Services
Validated Reviewer
Verified Current User
Review Source

"Use it for work, and haven't had any issues"

What do you like best?

Works great once you find good software, I would say you should use sourcetree

What do you dislike?

Lack of software diversity/support, most git software wont work

What business problems are you solving with the product? What benefits have you realized?

None really, could have used git

Kate from G2 Crowd

Learning about Mercurial?

I can help.
* We monitor all Mercurial reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. Validated reviews require the user to submit a screenshot of the product containing their user ID, in order to verify a user is an actual user of the product.