<story><title>What&apos;s New in Mercurial 3.0</title><url>http://hglabhq.com/blog/2014/4/29/what-s-new-in-mercurial-3-0</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>tomlu</author><text>I feel like Mercurial still has a chance to become a real force if it can provably solve some of the &lt;i&gt;real&lt;/i&gt; issues with git. It won&amp;#x27;t do to just have a nicer CLI since most people are used to git by now.&lt;p&gt;Here are some of git&amp;#x27;s real problems:&lt;p&gt;* Performance issues with multi-GB git repos
* Handling of large binary files
* Submodules - Mercurial has subrepos, but I don&amp;#x27;t know how they compare</text></comment>
<story><title>What&apos;s New in Mercurial 3.0</title><url>http://hglabhq.com/blog/2014/4/29/what-s-new-in-mercurial-3-0</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>wirrbel</author><text>While a lot of tutorials mention how complicated git is in contrast to mercurial I - being a git native - feel the other way around. Git is intuitive with a small number of concepts necessarry to grasp my whole workflow.&lt;p&gt;Using this workflow with mercurial is really frustrating when I do it - the occasional pull request for a python-based project. A git branch as a concept is really simple, the mercurial ways I just cant wrap my head around (granted I only use it occasionally).&lt;p&gt;As a platform I like how all the porcellain in mercurial  is implemented in a high level python. I can only wonder how productive writing custom porcellain commands in mercurial is given that interface.</text></comment>