The biggest thing git does is one person can get one or many branches (AKA version control) on ANY machine. They all act like they are the source of truth. CVS/Mercurial/etc…all have the issue that they expect to be on one machine as the source of truth. And if that machine ever goes down…
Before git (ya im old), I used a plethora of services like git. There were times back then when a server was down and the history…was just gone.
The biggest thing git does is one person can get one or many branches (AKA version control) on ANY machine. They all act like they are the source of truth. CVS/
Mercurial/etc…all have the issue that they expect to be on one machine as the source of truth. And if that machine ever goes down…Before git (ya im old), I used a plethora of services like git. There were times back then when a server was down and the history…was just gone.
Mercurial is decentralised, there is no single “source of truth”. (Not counting “upstream”, of course.)
Huh interesting, maybe it was the way we used it 15-20+ years ago or maybe it changed. No clue. But yes you are correct.
Both Mercurial and Git started around the same time as a replacement for BitKeeper - which also was decentralised.