Quick comparison
| # | App | Pricing | Verified price | Open source | Platforms | Verified facts | Score |
|---|
| 1 | FoFossil | Open source | — | Yes | Windows, macOS, Linux +1 | 5 of 5 | 79.8 |
| 2 |  Jujutsu (jj) | Open source | — | Yes | Windows, macOS, Linux | 5 of 5 | 42.3 |
| 3 | PiPijul | Open source | — | Yes | Linux, macOS, Windows | 5 of 5 | 42.3 |
| 4 |  Sapling SCM | Open source | — | Yes | macOS, Linux, Windows | 5 of 5 | 42.3 |
| 5 |  Darcs | Open source | — | Yes | Windows, macOS, Linux | 5 of 5 | 42.3 |
1FoBest for: Small teams and solo developers who want code, tickets and wiki in one self-hosted file
Open sourceSelf-hostableWindows, macOS, Linux, Self-hosted
Why switch from Mercurial
Also distributed and simple, plus a built-in bug tracker, wiki and web interface in one binary.
Pros
- Bug tracker, wiki, forum and web UI built into the repository
- Single executable and SQLite storage make install and backup easy
- Light enough to self-host on a cheap VPS or Raspberry Pi
- Permissive 2-clause BSD licence
Cons
- Small community and few third-party tools or integrations
- Mainstream code hosts only support it through a Git mirror
- Deliberately limits history rewriting, which Git users may miss
How this score is calculated
Editorial fit ×0.387
Reviews ×0.363
Clicks (90 days) ×0.15100
Freshness ×0.15100
Votes ×0.150
0 counted reviews, 0 up and 0 down votes. Full formula
2Best for: Developers who want a simpler, safer workflow while still pushing to Git hosts
Open sourceWindows, macOS, Linux
Why switch from Mercurial
Brings Mercurial-style ideas like revsets and easy history editing to Git-backed repos you can push anywhere.
Pros
- Works on existing Git repos, so teammates don't have to switch
- Operation log makes any command undoable
- Conflicts can be recorded and resolved later instead of blocking a rebase
- Free and Apache 2.0 licensed
Cons
- Command-line only, with GUI support coming from third-party tools
- No Git submodule or Git LFS support yet
- New concepts take time to learn for long-time Git users
How this score is calculated
Editorial fit ×0.312
Reviews ×0.363
Clicks (90 days) ×0.150
Freshness ×0.15100
Votes ×0.150
0 counted reviews, 0 up and 0 down votes. Full formula
3PiBest for: Developers curious about patch-based version control with cleaner merges than three-way merge
Open sourceLinux, macOS, Windows
Why switch from Mercurial
Patch-based alternative with commuting changes and more predictable merges.
Pros
- Changes commute, so cherry-picks and merges stay consistent
- Resolved conflicts stay resolved across branches
- Partial clones of large repositories
- Free software under GPL 2.0 or later
Cons
- Still a 1.0 beta release
- Small ecosystem: few GUIs, hosts or CI integrations compared with Git
- No official Windows binaries; installation is mainly through Cargo
How this score is calculated
Editorial fit ×0.312
Reviews ×0.363
Clicks (90 days) ×0.150
Freshness ×0.15100
Votes ×0.150
0 counted reviews, 0 up and 0 down votes. Full formula
4Best for: Git users who work with stacks of small commits and want easier amend, undo and review flows
Open sourcemacOS, Linux, Windows
Why switch from Mercurial
Grew out of Mercurial and adds stacked commits, smartlog and Git interop.
Pros
- Works with existing Git repositories and GitHub
- Stacked commits restack automatically after amends
- Undo, unamend and hide make mistakes easy to recover from
- Local web UI with drag-and-drop rebasing
Cons
- Server and virtual filesystem for huge repos are not public
- Git support may still have rough edges, per its own docs
- Design favours rebase-based, always-online workflows
How this score is calculated
Editorial fit ×0.312
Reviews ×0.363
Clicks (90 days) ×0.150
Freshness ×0.15100
Votes ×0.150
0 counted reviews, 0 up and 0 down votes. Full formula
5Best for: Developers who want patch-based, cherry-pick-friendly version control with a simple CLI
Open sourceWindows, macOS, Linux
Why switch from Mercurial
Distributed and offline like Mercurial, but tracks individual patches you can cherry-pick.
Pros
- Interactive commands make picking individual changes easy
- No central server needed; full offline work
- Free and open source under a non-profit umbrella
Cons
- Small ecosystem: few hosting services and tool integrations compared with Git
- Prebuilt binaries lag behind; building usually needs Haskell tooling
- Slow release pace and small contributor base
How this score is calculated
Editorial fit ×0.312
Reviews ×0.363
Clicks (90 days) ×0.150
Freshness ×0.15100
Votes ×0.150
0 counted reviews, 0 up and 0 down votes. Full formula