So far I only heared that git does not handle large binary files well and supposedly it is good to keep your large source tree (larger than the Linux-kernel !?) into many smaller git-repositories.
And you have to learn something new and unlearn bad habbits.
It doesn't handle large binary files well, but would you track patches on them anyway? It doesn't fit git's model. Git deals with the current working state of the whole repository, not individual files.
A major problem with git is that if you try to use it without realizing its fundamental model is different, it will seem awkward and complicated. Don't think about it as "like svn, but distributed"; start from zero.
For some projects you also want to track versions of binary files because they go together with the code. And I read it was a bad idea to use git for those binary files, exactly because git was not designed for that.
So far I only heared that git does not handle large binary files well and supposedly it is good to keep your large source tree (larger than the Linux-kernel !?) into many smaller git-repositories.
And you have to learn something new and unlearn bad habbits.
The no-easy-GUI-problem has been solved, right ?