I've been using git to manage the Dillo source locally. I just
installed mercurial to experiment with. Things I like about git are
the ability to rebase, ie. reorder patches. This is neat because I
can develop a patch on top of my local modifications and then push it
down the stack so that I submit a patch against the pristine source
rather than my customised version. The ability to stash your current
changes in a temporary branch is useful too. You could do all this
with explicit branches, but it would be more involved and git gives
you nice, quick and easy ways to do the same thing.
Mercurial seems to be the same sort of beast, though perhaps it is a
bit less of a "Swiss Army Chainsaw" than git. I'd be surprised if
there were any real issues using either to manage Dillo since I doubt
we'd be using anything more than the basic facilities that both offer.
I'd prefer git but only out of laziness as it's the one I already know
(which means I should probably investigate mercurial just to broaden
my mind if nothing else).
Regards,
Jeremy Henty
