Timeline for Why did Stack Exchange source control switch from hg to git?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 18, 2021 at 11:49 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://blog.stackoverflow.com with https://blog.stackoverflow.com
|
|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:36 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 8, 2016 at 15:19 | vote | accept | avvi | ||
| Apr 7, 2016 at 8:38 | history | edited | ᔕᖺᘎᕊ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 12 characters in body; edited title
|
| Apr 7, 2016 at 8:28 | answer | added | KonamimanStaffMod | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jan 5, 2015 at 12:54 | comment | added | avvi | Certainly could be reason. They used Visualhg which is a VS plugin and works great. Its not as fancy as git support in 2013, still I'd find it hard to believe if this was only reason. | |
| Jan 5, 2015 at 8:49 | comment | added | pepoluan |
Probably because Visual Studio 2013 provide full support for Git, and because Mercurial (with hg-git extension) can readily talk with a git back-end, but git has no easy way to talk to a Mercurial back-end.
|
|
| Jan 5, 2015 at 3:01 | comment | added | avvi | Lol @Shog9 thats what I'm afraid to hear | |
| Jan 4, 2015 at 22:58 | comment | added | psubsee2003 | Related for historical perspective: Why did the Stack Overflow team decide to use Mercurial for version control? (notice this was never answered) | |
| Jan 4, 2015 at 22:56 | comment | added | Shog9 Mod | Proving once again that peer pressure is the deciding factor in version control system choices. | |
| Jan 4, 2015 at 22:39 | history | asked | avvi | CC BY-SA 3.0 |