Git versus Mercurial for .NET developers?

Question

I\'ve been wondering what is the better DVCS for .NET developers? From reading various information it has sounded like Mercurial works better on Windows, but other information

Answer 1

I have been using Mercurial for over a year now for doing .NET development, and it has been working out great. I do admit I don't use any of the fancy tools (explorer add-ons and Visual studio tools), but they are available (e.g. TortoiseHg). I have found that using the command line tools is just as easy - just specify a few wildcards in .hgignore (as in Blaenk's answer) and you're good to go.

I'm not sure how well git integrates with hg, but for the reverse siutation I have used hg-git in the past and it worked fine. It is however still somewhat unstable as new releases of hg come out.

So you should be able to use github from mercurial, and for native mercurial repos there is always the (imo) equally nice bitbucket.org. Edit: Note also that codeplex, which is focused on .NET open source projects, now offers Git and Mercurial repositories.

And I should mention that "popularity" is a very difficult criterion to base your choice on. Either DVCS has high-profile users. Git has the linux kernel, of course, while notable hg users include the mozilla and Python projects.

EDIT: Since this seems to get regular upvotes. Everything I wrote above was true at the time of writing, but I no longer agree with my former self bitbucket is as nice as GitHub. GitHub has better functionality, and from my point of view (mostly F# open source development) everyone else is there so you get much better network effects. I moved all my project from codeplex/bitbucket to GitHub a while ago and immediately started getting contributions, whereas on codeplex/bitbucket next to nothing happened.