Relatively unscientific, but git merges feel smarter. It notices when I've moved a file (without telling it I did), and I experience fewer conflicts that I was used to. Some possible suggestions as to why here:
Also, the fact that commits have an atomic life is useful. If I cherry pick a change into a branch and then later merge it, Git generally knows what's up. With SVN this sort of scenario seemed to confuse things. Another advantage to this model is that it's very easy to compare (what commits differ between these, instead of a big code diff).
The differences may be subtle, but all in all I find myself much happier and more likely to use branches than I used to.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5035531/how-is-dvcs-git-m...
Also, the fact that commits have an atomic life is useful. If I cherry pick a change into a branch and then later merge it, Git generally knows what's up. With SVN this sort of scenario seemed to confuse things. Another advantage to this model is that it's very easy to compare (what commits differ between these, instead of a big code diff).
The differences may be subtle, but all in all I find myself much happier and more likely to use branches than I used to.