On 16 Sep 2015 18:48, "Paul Moore" <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 16 September 2015 at 06:10, Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
> >   The only thing that hg really lost badly on
> > IMO was "named branches", and that's been fixed with bookmarks.
>
> FWIW, I still find bookmarks confusing to use compared to git
> branches. I don't know whether that's because bitbucket doesn't
> support them well,

It's BitBucket - their PR system for Mercurial primarily relies on named branches rather than bookmarks. Gory details: https://bitbucket.org/site/master/issues/6705/cant-create-pull-request-from-hg-bookmark

Regards,
Nick.