if you are new to them both then it depends on what you need. a free github account doesn't include any private repositories whereas bitbucket free account gives you unlimited private repositories.
this was the selling thing for me - I didnt want to initially pay for github as i was trialing it but i didnt want me code to be free for all as it was commercial. This lead me to choose bitbucket
I now use both (github for my OSS products and bitbucket for more locked down code) but I am moving my entire team away from SVN to mercurial as it was a simplier step to go to that git. From personal experience, it was easier to get to grips with Hg initially before git when I was using a DVCS for the first time. It didnt require the complex git install and could be used from within the windows cmd or powershell windows
Atlassian is doing a great job improving Bitbucket since they aquired it. They are a company with a great product portfolio for software development/project management tooling. I think from a business perspective, that might be something to consider, especially if you use their tools already.
You really need to answer a basic question first. Do you want to use Mercurial or Git. I had to make this decision earlier this year. Mercurial was by far easier to setup and start using. I ultimately chose Git for the following reasons:
Most OpenSource Projects are moving from SVN to Git
Git allowed the most flexibility in whatever I wanted to do. (This is the main reason)
Third-party integration
If your business might need complicated version control processes go with Git. The learning curve is steep but it will be easier to do what you really want at the end of the day. I will qualify what I mean by 'steep'. The difference between teaching someone Mercurial vs. Git, is trying to get a Windows user to learn Linux command lines.
If you want a quick easy to use DVCS in which you think simple branching and versioning is all you will ever need, don't kill yourself with Git, use Mercurial. But keep in mind most people you talk to in Mailing lists, IRC, etc. will have experience with Git not Mercurial.
If you plan on paying for GitHub or BitBucket, I suggest you also look at Kiln. FogCreek has made mercurial even easier.
As already mentioned the difference between the options you mention is really git vs. Mercurial. This cannot be stressed enough.
git is a tool written by exceptional programmers for their personal needs. They want to be able to do exceptionally advanced things, they are confident that they know what they are doing.
If your organization does not only employ exceptional programmers, expect high costs for learning, trouble shooting and frustrated people discussing in the coffee room when using git.
Mercurial gives you 80% of the functionality for 20% of the effort compared to git. (Hmm, such claims might be close to violate Stackexchange policies, I have no real statistical evidence behind these numbers)
For the average programmer the functionality of git and Mercurial are very close to each other. For some special cases git might be superior even from business perspective. If they apply to you, I assume you have git experts in you organization already. If they can convince you, go for it.
I cannot comment about the service quality of the hosters you mention.
Disclaimer: Yes, I do use git and I do like it in certain aspects.
发布评论
评论（4）
如果您对它们都很陌生，那么这取决于您的需要。免费的 github 帐户不包含任何私人存储库，而 bitbucket 免费帐户为您提供无限的私人存储库。
这对我来说是卖点——我最初不想为 github 付费，因为我正在试用它，但我不希望我的代码对所有人免费，因为它是商业的。这导致我选择了 bitbucket，
我现在同时使用两者（github 用于我的 OSS 产品，bitbucket 用于更多锁定的代码），但我正在将我的整个团队从 SVN 转移到 Mercurial，因为使用 git 是一个更简单的步骤。从个人经验来看，当我第一次使用 DVCS 时，在 git 之前更容易掌握 Hg。它不需要复杂的 git 安装，可以在 Windows cmd 或 powershell windows 中使用
if you are new to them both then it depends on what you need. a free github account doesn't include any private repositories whereas bitbucket free account gives you unlimited private repositories.
this was the selling thing for me - I didnt want to initially pay for github as i was trialing it but i didnt want me code to be free for all as it was commercial. This lead me to choose bitbucket
I now use both (github for my OSS products and bitbucket for more locked down code) but I am moving my entire team away from SVN to mercurial as it was a simplier step to go to that git. From personal experience, it was easier to get to grips with Hg initially before git when I was using a DVCS for the first time. It didnt require the complex git install and could be used from within the windows cmd or powershell windows
自从 Atlassian 收购 Bitbucket 以来，他们在改进 Bitbucket 方面做得非常出色。他们是一家拥有丰富的软件开发/项目管理工具产品组合的公司。我认为从商业角度来看，这可能是值得考虑的事情，特别是如果您已经使用他们的工具的话。
Atlassian is doing a great job improving Bitbucket since they aquired it. They are a company with a great product portfolio for software development/project management tooling. I think from a business perspective, that might be something to consider, especially if you use their tools already.
您确实需要首先回答一个基本问题。您想使用 Mercurial 还是 Git。我不得不在今年早些时候做出这个决定。 Mercurial 的设置和开始使用要容易得多。我最终选择 Git 的原因如下：
如果您的业务可能需要复杂的版本控制流程，请使用 Git。学习曲线很陡峭，但最终会更容易做你真正想做的事情。我将限定我所说的“陡峭”的含义。教某人 Mercurial 与 Git 之间的区别在于试图让 Windows 用户学习 Linux 命令行。
如果您想要一个快速且易于使用的 DVCS，并且您认为简单的分支和版本控制就足够了，那么不要用 Git 自杀，请使用 Mercurial。但请记住，您在邮件列表、IRC 等中交谈的大多数人都拥有 Git 而非 Mercurial 的经验。
如果您打算付费购买 GitHub 或 BitBucket，我建议您也看看 Kiln。 FogCreek 让 Mercurial 变得更加容易。
You really need to answer a basic question first. Do you want to use Mercurial or Git. I had to make this decision earlier this year. Mercurial was by far easier to setup and start using. I ultimately chose Git for the following reasons:
If your business might need complicated version control processes go with Git. The learning curve is steep but it will be easier to do what you really want at the end of the day. I will qualify what I mean by 'steep'. The difference between teaching someone Mercurial vs. Git, is trying to get a Windows user to learn Linux command lines.
If you want a quick easy to use DVCS in which you think simple branching and versioning is all you will ever need, don't kill yourself with Git, use Mercurial. But keep in mind most people you talk to in Mailing lists, IRC, etc. will have experience with Git not Mercurial.
If you plan on paying for GitHub or BitBucket, I suggest you also look at Kiln. FogCreek has made mercurial even easier.
正如已经提到的，你提到的选项之间的区别实际上是 git 与 Mercurial。这一点怎么强调都不为过。
git 是由杰出程序员根据个人需求编写的工具。他们希望能够做非常先进的事情，他们相信自己知道自己在做什么。
如果您的组织不仅雇用优秀的程序员，那么在使用 git 时，学习、解决问题以及沮丧的人们在咖啡室讨论的成本都会很高。
与 git 相比，Mercurial 只需 20% 的工作量即可提供 80% 的功能。 （嗯，这样的说法可能接近违反 Stackexchange 政策，我没有这些数字背后的真正统计证据）
对于普通程序员来说，git 和 Mercurial 的功能非常接近。对于某些特殊情况，即使从业务角度来看，git 也可能更优越。如果它们适用于您，我假设您的组织中已经有 git 专家了。如果他们能说服你，那就去做吧。
我无法评论您提到的托管服务商的服务质量。
免责声明：是的，我确实使用 git，并且在某些方面我确实喜欢它。
As already mentioned the difference between the options you mention is really git vs. Mercurial. This cannot be stressed enough.
git is a tool written by exceptional programmers for their personal needs. They want to be able to do exceptionally advanced things, they are confident that they know what they are doing.
If your organization does not only employ exceptional programmers, expect high costs for learning, trouble shooting and frustrated people discussing in the coffee room when using git.
Mercurial gives you 80% of the functionality for 20% of the effort compared to git. (Hmm, such claims might be close to violate Stackexchange policies, I have no real statistical evidence behind these numbers)
For the average programmer the functionality of git and Mercurial are very close to each other. For some special cases git might be superior even from business perspective. If they apply to you, I assume you have git experts in you organization already. If they can convince you, go for it.
I cannot comment about the service quality of the hosters you mention.
Disclaimer: Yes, I do use git and I do like it in certain aspects.