Comparison with Git, Mercurial or Darcs?

[David Ingamells]

I investigated mercurial almost 2 years ago when we had to choose a new 
CM (we chose bzr) and at that time, although they claimed support for 
renames, it didn't work. Since correct support for renames was one of 
the criteria for our CM, that was a black mark for mercurial.

It could be that mercurial has long fixed the problem, but still suffers 
now from people's memory latency from those days!

David

Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Daniel Carrera <dcarrera at gmail.com> writes:
>
>   
>> really does is a delete+add. Is this correct?
>>     
>
> It's a copy+delete, which makes a big difference: the new file has the
> old one as ancestor.
>
> Now, anyway, you don't really care what the tool does really, you care
> about the effect of what it does. Mercurial has had a broken
> management of renames in its early days (it couldn't merge changes to
> a renamed file), but I believe rename management works well now (I'm
> not a mercurial expert though).
>
>