5 ms·

This is a little disappointing for several reasons. I understand the merits of GitHub but I really wish Python at least stuck with Mercurial repository and some

by agentgt 10y ago

This is a little disappointing for several reasons. I understand the merits of GitHub but I really wish Python at least stuck with Mercurial repository and some decentralization. It's especially sad because Mercurial is just now starting to be incredibly powerful with evolutions. I guess I'm an old fart but all the centralization has made me paranoid and I still absolutely prefer Mercurial (albeit with plugins) over git.

jsmeaton 10y ago
You mention decentralization a lot, but nothing has really changed. All cpython devs still have a full clone on their machines. GitHub functions as a hub now rather than https://hg.python.org/cpython https://hg.python.org/cpython.
- agentgt 10y ago
  I must have missed some things but they not only switched repository formats they moved the central to github [1]. All opensource projects on github is centralization in my book creates unfair leverage that github has and will have. For people to work on Python they now have to share information with github which they may not want (they have to create an account and are probably tracked). 1: https://docs.python.org/devguide/setup.html https://docs.python.org/devguide/setup.html
  - tracker1 10y ago
    Two things, that's also an advantage... and the vast majority of programmers I know have a github account anyway. Github has made it very easy to access/port everything in and out if you choose to do so. Git itself is decentralized. Some of github tools are centralized, but that has both advantages and disadvantages, and I and a lot of others feel the advantages outweight the latter.
    - agentgt 10y ago
      Like I said I don't argue with merits of github greatly widening the audience but I like said in other sibling threads github is more than just the source control itself: it is bugs, content, workflow, etc. I guess I'm just becoming more Stallman in my age but I don't like my development life turning into Facebook. I can't even communicate with a large portion of family and friend with out resorting to using FB. A platform without doubt tracks the hell out of you. And you could argue the web is decentralized (aka your comment Git itself is decentralized) so Facebook is not that bad but is it? Does that really matter?
      - tracker1 10y ago
        I can respect that... however, sometimes it's not worth fighting... you can export your bugs, content, etc from github, and import into self-hosted gitlab, or other options if so desired. Then you lose the community aspect, but it's not exactly hindered. I just don't see GH turning into SourceForge. I know it can happen, doesn't mean it will, and if they (GH) ever head down that path, people will exodus.
        agentgt 10y ago
        GitHub is far more intrusive than SourceForge (don't get me wrong on quality though... SF is a piece of crap). Remember GitHub has a lot of people's credit cards! Even Facebook doesn't have that. GitHub could easily some day sell user information (if they are not already). The could sell it to recruiting companies (like my own company) or they could sell it even to ecommerce companies like Amazon. Comparing GH to SF is not really even remotely useful because things have changed so much (in terms of technology, biz models, users ...etc ).
dbcurtis 10y ago
Bah. Anybody can clone a git repo. It's trivial to move off of github with a git repo if they want, or possible to migrate to another database if they want to go through the disruption. Going to git is about gaining developer mindshare. There are more people using git now. So being on git will bring in more "drive by pr's". I know for my part, life is too short to keep current on multiple source code control tools. I've done plenty in my time, but git is where I'm at now. I use git now at work, and until now, all of the hobby projects that interested me except for 1, were on git. Now all are on git. At PyCon 2016 Guido told the story of how Mercurial was selected over git. It seemed like an even match at the time. Guido is very source-code-control-tool-agnostic. But git is the current best path to enabling more people to help with cpython development.
- agentgt 10y ago
  It is hardly trivial to move off. Bugs would have to be migrated, links updated, documentation, automated build systems, workflow as well as user remapping. While not being Mercurial is one thing it is really more about being on GitHub that is the problem. Kings will get complacent (remember how long it took to GitHub to add some features). I also vaguely remember the github guys trashing Mercurial with arguabley a propaganda campaign (something "git is better than X"). All that content is missing now but I do remember (I'll have to look on way back machine later).
glogla 10y ago
Yes, this is disappointing on many levels. Github is proprietary, semi-monopolistic (in the way Microsoft holds semi-monopoly on desktops) and it's also nest of reactionary vipers [1]. Python community is full of cool and nice people. I guess I expected more from them. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118
collinmanderson 10y ago
Mercurial still doesn't have Python 3.x support. I imagine that's an extra encouragement for the Python devs to switch away from it.
- 16bytes 10y ago
  Why would it matter if mercurial has python 3.x support? For writing hooks and extensions? The mercurial team prioritized end-user features, like evolve, over moving to Python 3, which would only affect a very small number of mercurial users (mostly devs). I've personally moved to Python 3 for most development and not once have I encountered a case where I couldn't do something in mercurial that would have been possible if the core code was on python 3.
  - BuckRogers 10y ago
    That's how the CPython core devs think. They believe they're punishing Mercurial for not moving to Python3.
    - jwilk 10y ago
      [citation needed]
    - 16bytes 10y ago
      That's a completely unsupported assertion. Why would the CPython devs punish one of the largest and well known python projects by moving to a non-python DVCS? That would create an absolutely toxic effect in the python community. They didn't move from mercurial because of python any more than they moved to Git because they like C.

by agentgt 10y ago

jsmeaton 10y ago

You mention decentralization a lot, but nothing has really changed. All cpython devs still have a full clone on their machines. GitHub functions as a hub now rather than https://hg.python.org/cpython https://hg.python.org/cpython.

agentgt 10y ago
I must have missed some things but they not only switched repository formats they moved the central to github [1]. All opensource projects on github is centralization in my book creates unfair leverage that github has and will have. For people to work on Python they now have to share information with github which they may not want (they have to create an account and are probably tracked). 1: https://docs.python.org/devguide/setup.html https://docs.python.org/devguide/setup.html
- tracker1 10y ago
  Two things, that's also an advantage... and the vast majority of programmers I know have a github account anyway. Github has made it very easy to access/port everything in and out if you choose to do so. Git itself is decentralized. Some of github tools are centralized, but that has both advantages and disadvantages, and I and a lot of others feel the advantages outweight the latter.
  - agentgt 10y ago
    Like I said I don't argue with merits of github greatly widening the audience but I like said in other sibling threads github is more than just the source control itself: it is bugs, content, workflow, etc. I guess I'm just becoming more Stallman in my age but I don't like my development life turning into Facebook. I can't even communicate with a large portion of family and friend with out resorting to using FB. A platform without doubt tracks the hell out of you. And you could argue the web is decentralized (aka your comment Git itself is decentralized) so Facebook is not that bad but is it? Does that really matter?
    - tracker1 10y ago
      I can respect that... however, sometimes it's not worth fighting... you can export your bugs, content, etc from github, and import into self-hosted gitlab, or other options if so desired. Then you lose the community aspect, but it's not exactly hindered. I just don't see GH turning into SourceForge. I know it can happen, doesn't mean it will, and if they (GH) ever head down that path, people will exodus.
      - agentgt 10y ago
        GitHub is far more intrusive than SourceForge (don't get me wrong on quality though... SF is a piece of crap). Remember GitHub has a lot of people's credit cards! Even Facebook doesn't have that. GitHub could easily some day sell user information (if they are not already). The could sell it to recruiting companies (like my own company) or they could sell it even to ecommerce companies like Amazon. Comparing GH to SF is not really even remotely useful because things have changed so much (in terms of technology, biz models, users ...etc ).

dbcurtis 10y ago

Bah. Anybody can clone a git repo. It's trivial to move off of github with a git repo if they want, or possible to migrate to another database if they want to go through the disruption. Going to git is about gaining developer mindshare. There are more people using git now. So being on git will bring in more "drive by pr's". I know for my part, life is too short to keep current on multiple source code control tools. I've done plenty in my time, but git is where I'm at now. I use git now at work, and until now, all of the hobby projects that interested me except for 1, were on git. Now all are on git. At PyCon 2016 Guido told the story of how Mercurial was selected over git. It seemed like an even match at the time. Guido is very source-code-control-tool-agnostic. But git is the current best path to enabling more people to help with cpython development.

agentgt 10y ago
It is hardly trivial to move off. Bugs would have to be migrated, links updated, documentation, automated build systems, workflow as well as user remapping. While not being Mercurial is one thing it is really more about being on GitHub that is the problem. Kings will get complacent (remember how long it took to GitHub to add some features). I also vaguely remember the github guys trashing Mercurial with arguabley a propaganda campaign (something "git is better than X"). All that content is missing now but I do remember (I'll have to look on way back machine later).

glogla 10y ago

Yes, this is disappointing on many levels. Github is proprietary, semi-monopolistic (in the way Microsoft holds semi-monopoly on desktops) and it's also nest of reactionary vipers [1]. Python community is full of cool and nice people. I guess I expected more from them. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9966118

collinmanderson 10y ago

Mercurial still doesn't have Python 3.x support. I imagine that's an extra encouragement for the Python devs to switch away from it.

16bytes 10y ago
Why would it matter if mercurial has python 3.x support? For writing hooks and extensions? The mercurial team prioritized end-user features, like evolve, over moving to Python 3, which would only affect a very small number of mercurial users (mostly devs). I've personally moved to Python 3 for most development and not once have I encountered a case where I couldn't do something in mercurial that would have been possible if the core code was on python 3.
- BuckRogers 10y ago
  That's how the CPython core devs think. They believe they're punishing Mercurial for not moving to Python3.
  - jwilk 10y ago
    [citation needed]
  - 16bytes 10y ago
    That's a completely unsupported assertion. Why would the CPython devs punish one of the largest and well known python projects by moving to a non-python DVCS? That would create an absolutely toxic effect in the python community. They didn't move from mercurial because of python any more than they moved to Git because they like C.