> More people use git; I'm becoming increasingly convinced that few of them actually know git.
And yet I have noticed that people find merging and branching much easier than in mercurial. Few people understand the implications of named branches in hg.
> And yet I have noticed that people find merging and branching much easier than in mercurial.
That's the first time I've heard this opinion - do you know what kind of complaints people have?
In my experience, it's much easier to say 'When you start work on an issue, start a branch called 'issue-XXX', then once you're done we will merge it into the default branch'. I've never seen much confusion in response to that.
Not as weird as hijacking the term "branch" to mean a symlink to a ref that is not part of the history. Then again why make it easier by naming it to something more intuitive, like say, "bookmark".
And yet I have noticed that people find merging and branching much easier than in mercurial. Few people understand the implications of named branches in hg.