Mercurial
Hacker ApprovedRanked 3 of 26 version control systems by recommenders
Recommended as a friendlier, more predictable alternative to Git with clear commands and branch history kept in commits, though critics call it slow and short on Git-centric tooling.
Recommended as a friendlier, more predictable alternative to Git with clear commands and branch history kept in commits, though critics call it slow and short on Git-centric tooling.
164 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 121
- criticize it
- 43
- approval share
- 74%
Recommended in 12 of 13 months
- November 2025: recommended
- December 2025: recommended
- January 2026: recommended
- February 2026: recommended
- March 2026: recommended
- April 2026: recommended
- May 2026: recommended
- June 2026: recommended
- July 2026: recommended
- August 2026: recommended
- September 2026: recommended
- October 2026: recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Owned for 19 years
Median of the 7 owners who said how long they have had it.
Each square is one year.
Why it carries the badge
- 121 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, met.
- 2.8 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, met.
- Recommended in 12 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Friendlier and easier than Git
“The difference is that Mercurial lets you duck it until you need it while Git slaps you in the face with it at every commit.”
Comment from 18 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “Mercurial was definitely friendlier for people who didn't have time time to go through the technicalities of git.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “I thought Mercurial was way more user-friendly while providing all the features and performance needed.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” - Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
- Comment from 28 Apr 2026 in “Ted Nyman – High Performance Git”
- Comment from 18 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
- Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
- Comment from 14 Apr 2026 in “What is jj and why should I care?”
- Comment from 3 Dec 2025 in “Zig quits GitHub, says Microsoft's AI obsession has ruined the service”
- Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
- Comment from 11 Apr 2026 in “What is RISC-V and why it matters to Canonical”
Clear, predictable command names
“Commands with obvious names that allow moving around without understanding chains of dependencies.”
Comment from 18 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “You get the best of both worlds--a sane set of commands and a distributed version control system”
Comment from 11 Nov 2025 in “The lazy Git UI you didn't know you need” “The Mercurial CLI has clear, well named commands that are predictable and easy to memorize.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” - Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
Branches and real history preserved
“I liked the Mercurial branching model better than git, due to the branches being a first class record of events.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “Branching in Mercurial is as good as or better than in git, but it takes a few minutes of additional reading”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “Mercurial provides more value out of the box than git because it preserves branch info in commits”
Comment from 15 Apr 2026 in “GitHub Stacked PRs” - Comment from 12 Jan 2026 in “Fossil versus Git”
- Comment from 14 Apr 2026 in “GitHub Stacked PRs”
Used internally by Facebook, Google
“Around 20 years ago Facebook made the same choice, so you're in good company in terms of technically sophisticated shops.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “Both Facebook and Google internally use a custom version of mercurial, so I wouldn't count it out just yet.”
Comment from 18 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
What people warn about
Each mark is one comment
Slow because written in Python
“Mercurial has a strictly superior API. The issue is solely that OG Mercurial was written in Python.”
Comment from 13 Apr 2026 in “GitHub Stacked PRs” “Mercurial was a competitor to Git that was written in Python and lost partly because it was way too slow.”
Comment from 21 May 2026 in “Python 3.15: features that didn't make the headlines” “Mercurial is too slow. Even with chg common commands like `hg status` may take hundreds of milliseconds.”
Comment from 1 Sep 2026 in “The creator of Jujutsu has joined ERSC” Ecosystem and tooling favor Git
“Mercurial never had an equivalent platform push, which turned out to matter more than any of its technical merits.”
Comment from 21 May 2026 in “Will agents like Git any more than we do?” “mercurial had it figured out and got completely ignored because of the dominance of git's monoculture”
Comment from 21 Oct 2026 in “MicroG: Free-libre re-implementation of Google's proprietary Android user space” “Mercurial was way easier to use and fit our use case but all the tooling was built for git.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” - Comment from 15 Jul 2026 in “Linux 0.11 rewritten in idiomatic Rust, boots in QEMU”
Disliked branching and revision numbering
“Mercurial’s branching model was very poor, and its sequentially numbered revision system was and remains a very bad design.”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]” “the lack of real branching and the need to use DirState or Queues for selective commits made Mercurial feel too much like p4”
Comment from 20 Nov 2025 in “What Killed Perl?” “needing to make up a name for your branch before committing (unless you like rewriting) was not awesome”
Comment from 17 May 2026 in “Mercurial, 20 years and counting: how are we still alive and kicking? [video]”
Other version control systems people recommend
The four most recommended other version control systems, with the same counts for each, so you can compare like for like. The tick on each bar marks the 2 to 1 line the badge needs.
| Product | Recommend | Criticize | Approval | Months | Owned | Badge |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Git | 814 | 503 | 62% | 13 | 15 yrs42 owners | — |
| Jujutsu (jj) | 335 | 106 | 76% | 13 | 1 yr21 owners | Approved |
| Mercurial | 121 | 43 | 74% | 12 | 19 yrs7 owners | Approved |
| jj (Jujutsu) | 115 | 37 | 76% | 12 | 1 yr7 owners | Approved |
| Fossil | 106 | 19 | 85% | 13 | 17 yrs7 owners | Approved |
What people said
40 of the 229 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“mercurial had it figured out and got completely ignored because of the dominance of git's monoculture”
“Mercurial is too slow. Even with chg common commands like `hg status` may take hundreds of milliseconds.”
“Git (and Mercurial) allowed doing version control without an internet connection for the first time”
“Suddenly I was able to teleport myself to a version from before the lunch while SVN history was crystal clear.”
“plenty have failed that might otherwise have succeeded because of that too. For example Mercurial.”
“Mercurial never had an equivalent platform push, which turned out to matter more than any of its technical merits.”
“Mercurial was a competitor to Git that was written in Python and lost partly because it was way too slow.”
“I use Mercurial more than git and I rarely commit everything in my working directory in a single commit”
“The difference is that Mercurial lets you duck it until you need it while Git slaps you in the face with it at every commit.”
“Commands with obvious names that allow moving around without understanding chains of dependencies.”
“Both Facebook and Google internally use a custom version of mercurial, so I wouldn't count it out just yet.”
“It just worked. They understood the mental model and happily used it to protect their stuff.”
“You also get stable identifiers for commits that remain the same even after being manipulated”
“every mercurial user I know can intuitively use `hg rebase` with its `-s` and `-d` flags”
“Mercurial was definitely friendlier for people who didn't have time time to go through the technicalities of git.”
“I always preferred Mercurial to Git, but now that Jujutsu is out there, I think Mercurial's demise is all but guaranteed.”
“The Mercurial CLI has clear, well named commands that are predictable and easy to memorize.”
“virtually everything in mercurial was slightly better-designed, more user-friendly, and more polished”
“Branching in Mercurial is as good as or better than in git, but it takes a few minutes of additional reading”
“hg's usage metaphor hews closer to the received wisdom of people coming from stuff like subversion and perforce”
“needing to make up a name for your branch before committing (unless you like rewriting) was not awesome”
“it had a lot of nice features for instance hg came with a web server/interface out of the box”
“I liked the Mercurial branching model better than git, due to the branches being a first class record of events.”
“Mercurial’s branching model was very poor, and its sequentially numbered revision system was and remains a very bad design.”
“Mercurial was way easier to use and fit our use case but all the tooling was built for git.”
“Around 20 years ago Facebook made the same choice, so you're in good company in terms of technically sophisticated shops.”
“My rationale was that Mercurial was a lot safer and user-friendly compared to git.”
“I thought Mercurial was way more user-friendly while providing all the features and performance needed.”
“I was exposed to Mercurial before Git and I stubbornly tried to advocate for it over Git for a while.”
“Anyone who has ever used Mercurial knows very well what a good versioning tool UX looks like”
“Mercurial provides more value out of the box than git because it preserves branch info in commits”
“If you had started off with Mercurial, like I did, I am sure it would feel much smoother”
“For most project, "useful history" or "real history" is better than a "clean" history.”
“Mercurial has a strictly superior API. The issue is solely that OG Mercurial was written in Python.”
“Mercurial offered a more pleasant user interface, superior cross-platform support”
“hg sees history as useful metadata, and therefore you shouldn't dress it up artificially.”
“Mercurial was/is nice and imho smooths off a lot of the unnecessarily rough git edges.”
“the lack of real branching and the need to use DirState or Queues for selective commits made Mercurial feel too much like p4”
“You get the best of both worlds--a sane set of commands and a distributed version control system”
“There have been other VCS tools with arguably better UIs and feature sets than Git (Mercurial, Fossil)”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.