17 ms·

Sourcehut welcomes Bitbucket refugees

412 points by ddevault 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
nik736 7y ago
How was this upvoted so often without a single comment?
- arghwhat 7y ago
  Commentary is not needed to be interesting. There may not be much to add.
- high_derivative 7y ago
  My guess would be because HN likes sourcehut's open source approach (I still read it as 'Sir Hat') since its announcement on here. There are some projects that HN as a community tends to like and upvote just for visibility without feeling the need to comment on it.
- rightbyte 7y ago
  Bots? I have a hard time beleiving that a paid service has a silent fanbase. But maybe they do.
  - shakna 7y ago
    I'm a paying user. Beyond the article there's not much to say.
  - sirn 7y ago
    I am one. Happy paying user, upvoted sourcehut's posts because I like to support independent services, but rarely commented.
    - rightbyte 7y ago
      Ok never mind then.
  - asdkhadsj 7y ago
    I'm a wanting-to-be paying user, fwiw. It goes against some of Sourcehut's fundamentals, but I'm waiting for a basic PR UI system, because frankly I just don't like email that much. (though strangely, I love the model of email). Regardless, I adore the goals of the service and the approach, so my plan is to move all my public and private projects there once I can use a PR-UI/etc - and pay, of course.
    - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
      I think you should give email its fair shake. There's a good tutorial here: https://git-send-email.io https://git-send-email.io And the video on this website shows you how the maintainer side could work: https://aerc-mail.org https://aerc-mail.org And remember, the email client you use for hacking needn't be the same as your everyday client.
      - ianamartin 7y ago
        Huh. That never occurred to me. To use a different client for workflow email. That was sort of one of the things keeping me from trying this out for real. I was just, "Ugh, I don't want all that mixed up together." Even folders don't help that much because my main email client is already managing a ton of email accounts. I'll have to give this idea a shot now. Thanks!
- roryrjb 7y ago
  Beyond what sourcehut is providing, I would also upvote because of Drew (Sir_Cmpwn). I don't know him personally, but based on blog posts, HN comments and interaction via email, he seems to be very helpful and polite, my general impression is that this isn't the norm in open source.
- pjc50 7y ago
  That's a good sign. Comments usually signal quibbling to outrage; there's no culture of "me too" (in the AOL sense, not the sexual assault one!) here.
zaarn 7y ago
This looks suspiciously like a spam campaign to fish for users desperate enough to go anywhere but bitbucket.
- arghwhat 7y ago
  BitBucket is discontinuing Mercurial, forcing users thereof to jump ship. Sourcehut is just doing a bit of marketing around their continued support for those needing new hosting.
- Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
  That's... really rude. Sourcehut has been around for a while: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=sourcehut&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=sourcehut&sort=byPopularity&pr...
  - zaarn 7y ago
    Doesn't mean you're not fishing for users there.
    - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
      Isn't literally everyone fishing for users? Relax dude. People need somewhere to go and maybe they'll find Sourcehut suitable to their needs. I don't know what your definition of spam is but this definitely doesn't qualify for my (unusually strict) definition of it.
      - zaarn 7y ago
        Well, the page contains nothing but a tool to import data from a competitor in order to get users of the competitor to sign up for your service. That meets my definition of spam to a certain extend.
        Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
        The competitor is leaving the market, which hardly makes them a competitor at all. Any users who don't want to be left out in the cold need tools like this.
tstusr20190823 7y ago
Am I the only one who can't find the source of this "open source software"? How they can beat Bitbucket while they hide the code under unusable UI?
- rgoulter 7y ago
  > Where is the source? The homepage links to https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/?search=sr.ht https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/?search=sr.ht (EDIT: which is now also the URL in the blogpost with the link text "100% open source software") There are also Hg repos at hg.sr.ht; idk how easy it is to find git.sr.ht from hg.sr.ht. > how can they beat Bitbucket while the code is unusable Well, for Hg users, it's not like there's going to be much of a choice in a year (given BB is sunsetting Hg support), right?
  - tstusr20190823 7y ago
    Mercurial users can use their builtin Web UI unlike Git users
    - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
      git has gitweb: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb But in both cases, the user has to have a server to put it on, making services like Sourcehut and Bitbucket (may it rest in peace) useful.
      - tstusr20190823 7y ago
        gitweb requires server setup, while Mercurial web ui can quickly start locally without any configuration and that was the one of mercurial selling point until github and other services arrives.
        Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
        `git instaweb` is sufficient to get a working gitweb stood up.
einpoklum 7y ago
Am I the only one who reads that as "source chute"? Also - nice initiative, I guess, but I have to say their web UI seems to be stuck in the 1990s.
- vnorilo 7y ago
  I'm currently considering moving from bitbucket to sourcehut. Another way sr.ht is stuck in the 1990s is that it doesn't bludgeon my browser with analytics and gazillion requests like a certain bucket was fond of doing. In general, sr.ht seems simple, in a very positive way. AFAICT, it doesn't try to compete with the GitHub-ish web UI for pull requests and code review. Personally, I don't mind.
- interfixus 7y ago
  > their web UI seems to be stuck in the 1990s To some of us decidedly a feature, not a bug. And: > All features work without JavaScript My endless upvote.
  - s_Hogg 7y ago
    I just went for a look because of your JS remark and holy moses that's a fast site. I still sometimes forget how slow stuff is relative to what's possible, even though I frequent HN.
- Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
  The goal is to be simple and easy to use. The UI should get out of your way ASAP - you're there to get things done, not to gawk at the pretty UI. As a bonus, it's very fast and small, easy on your web browser even on old computers or slow internet connections. And it's not spying on you! That being said, I have been working on conservative improvements to make it a little bit more pleasing to the eye, without sacrificing the principles behind it. More color, for example, is not going to be added, or will be added cautiously, because color is used sparingly to attract your eye to the most common reason you would come to a page. Each element of the page should be intuitive and have purpose before it's pretty.
  - 7y ago
einpoklum 7y ago
When you register, you notice that: > Notice: sr.ht is currently in alpha, and the quality of the service reflects that. As such, payment is currently optional, and only encouraged for users who want to support the ongoing development of the site. Caveat emptor.
- ddevault 7y ago
  For more details on what the alpha entails, see also: https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/ https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/
  - Operyl 7y ago
    Is that page in a repo somewhere? There’s a typo or two to fix.
    - fabrixxm 7y ago
      https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut.org/tree/master/content/alpha-details.md https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut.org/tree/master/conten...
viach 7y ago
They violently break all the recent frontend best practices. Where is the React or Vie, SPA architecture, tons of JS? There should be a federal law prohibiting making fast and simple UIs so that nobody will have concerns that the UI frameworks war leads us to great future.
- vnorilo 7y ago
  There’s not even any analytics or trackers. The shame!
  - panpanna 7y ago
    And no non-standard fonts on some random CDN. My eyes are bleeding
  - yk 7y ago
    Perhaps one could use greasemonkey to inject Google analytics into arbitrary sites. (And load some font, and perhaps have a 20 second timeout somewhere.)
    - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
      Reverse-reader view! Isn't there a bookmarklet that Geocities-ifies pages somewhere, same idea.
    - buildzr 7y ago
      Don't forget Facebook like buttons, those really need to be front and center on every page.
    - bald42 7y ago
      No worries the snakeoil antivirus suites already does that for you ;-)
  - rutthenut 7y ago
    These comments put me in mind of https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ and http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/
mikl 7y ago
…all five of them ;)
lpcvoid 7y ago
This is how websites should always be. Great job!
ulkesh 7y ago
Serious questions... What does mercurial offer that git doesn’t? Is the transition to git difficult for projects currently housed in a mercurial repository?
- nbevans 7y ago
  For one thing it offers a far cleaner user experience than Git does.
  - foxhop 7y ago
    AKA the commands actually make sense, and they have sane defaults so you don't have to remember 100+ random flags.
    - jgraham 7y ago
      People always claim this in mercurial posts, but it's really hard to tell to what extent this is just that people who are using hg all the time are familiar with the hg commands and so don't notice the problems any more. As a irregular hg user, I frequently run into (or help others with) issues with the ui, like "why does `hg log require `-f` to do something useful", "how do I refer to the current head commit (protip: it's not `tip`)", "how do I see changes relative to a branch (bookmark) on a remote" and "which set of commands am I supposed to use for history rewriting nowadays and how do they work?". hg has some nice features, but the idea that it's got a fully intuitive and uniformly well designed interface is, in my experience, a total myth. Which isn't to say that git has a great CLI of course, just that the extent to which hg is better in this area is often overstated.
      - WorldMaker 7y ago
        I think it's also at least somewhat the case that hg had a great CLI when it launched and git had an abysmal CLI when it launched, but over the years and counting "necessary" hg extensions, they've both sort of converged more towards the middle: git's has only gotten better (and really only had room to get better) and hg's has mostly stayed the same, if not slowly gotten worse from the additional "overhead" of extensions. Which is that the difference between the CLIs in the early days were stark contrasts of good and bad, but now they both seem about equally mediocre, but in different ways, when directly contrasted. (Especially with the latest git release finally splitting checkout into switch and restore, they are really on increasingly similar footing.)
whatshisface 7y ago
People seem pretty interested in keeping their pre-git source control system, even if it means switching repository hosts. I know the default attitude is "they're just curmudgeons who don't want to change," but Hg could have some advantages.
- wilsonnb3 7y ago
  Mercurial shouldn't be considered a pre-git source control system. It's initial release date was actually 12 days after git and it is far more comparable to git than it is to SVN and other pre-git version control systems.
  - BeetleB 7y ago
    I think he meant "the source control they used before using git" - not that it came out first.
    - krupan 7y ago
      But there really are people that purposefully went from git to hg. Calling hg a "pre-git" version control system makes some assumptions that just aren't true.
- foxhop 7y ago
  For me, I started using Hg before I started using Git, so I have about as many Hg repos as Git repos. I also started using Bitbucket, back when that was the only option (they didn't have git support until Atlassian bought them). I have no personal desire to transform these Hg repos into Git. That just seems like busy work. Bitbucket is causing work for me (granted I never paid them a dime over these last 10+ years, so I have nothing to complain about). My choices are to migrate these repos from Hg to git, or move hosts. I'm pretty sure I'm going to move hosts, seems like less work.
- juped 7y ago
  If you can avoid inflicting a painful VCS migration on yourself, you probably should.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
doubleunplussed 7y ago
I am looking to preserve the pull requests and corresponding comment threads from bitbucket. I'm thinking the way to go might be to save static HTML of the pages and host them somewhere, modifying the links to issues to point to migrated ones, and links to PRs to the hosted pages. Anyone else thinking of trying this approach? Advice, criticism?
- Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
  At some point it should be possible to adjust the import script to also generate an mbox of pull requests discussions and import it into lists.sr.ht, but that's a lot more complicated. Happy to talk over the details if anyone is interested in taking a crack at this.
jtr1 7y ago
Doesn't it seems like a bit of an abuse of language to refer to former bitbucket users as "refugees"?
- flyingfences 7y ago
  It's a commonly used figure of speech.
  - jtr1 7y ago
    Lifelong english speaker, American. Never heard this one in software until today.
- jason_s 7y ago
  no, because like real-world refugees, we are left to flee Atlassian without an obvious place to relocate.
  - stjohnswarts 7y ago
    I so wish my company would ditch them and use opensource alternatives. I'm so tired of feeding of the beast, yet we just get deeper and deeper in.
- stjohnswarts 7y ago
  No I would say it's a little snarky but in a time of overuse of political correctness that every little bit of rebellion helps.
ourlordcaffeine 7y ago
There are dozens of us who use Mercurial! Dozens!
eigenhombre 7y ago
Starting using Sourcehut a few days ago for two repos and have had a good experience so far (being a new paid user is my only affiliation with sr.ht): - Very clean, simple UI/UX providing deceptively rich feature set - A build system among the easiest I've used - Solid, straightforward documentation Currently it's a little slow to push to repos but the creator says it's a known problem with ongoing regular improvements occurring. I'm a long time GitHub user with many repos there and there are lots of GH features I like (like Org Mode READMEs). But I'm a big fan of this sort of business model: someone puts together a simple, solid, independent service; I pay a small amount monthly/yearly (I chose to pay voluntarily even though it's currently optional). I hope this service thrives.
ulisesrmzroche 7y ago
So what happened to Bitbucket? Don't got any opinion either way, just wondering about the "refugee" part
- t0astbread 7y ago
  They're dropping support for Mercurial: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitbucket#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitbucket#History
- teh_klev 7y ago
  See previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20745393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20745393 https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-b...
jammygit 7y ago
I tried sourcehut a while ago but I found the pull request flow to be confusing. There aren’t actual pull requests but instead some sort of email flow that I didn’t have time to figure out. If there was a video walkthrough for the process, it would help people like me get the ball rolling faster
- vangale 7y ago
  There's no video (that I know of) but Sourcehut has put up a website with a set of steps/instructions for email based pull requests: https://git-send-email.io/ https://git-send-email.io/
todd3834 7y ago
I literally forgot about Mercurial. It’s been years since I’ve even heard it mentioned. Are there any strong arguments for using it over Git these days? Is this just about supporting legacy code bases. I’m sure there must be a way to migrate to Git [and maintain history]. I’m not trolling, I would love to hear from someone who prefers Mercurial over Git as to how it benefits them.
- dragonsh 7y ago
  Our company use mercurial and we are very happy with it. Mercurial has evolved and it's UI is still better than git. We use it due to following reasons: 1. Very easy to use and very well documented with a book.[1] 2. Mercurial good python philosophy of "explicit is better than implicit". This means every merge also needs to explicitly committed preserving history. Our team likes it. 3. Better multi-platform support. 4. Easy to extend to fit specific workflow. 5. Just run hg serve and access a beautiful web interface to review code. No need of external tools. In this aspect though fossil-scm [2] is ahead of both git and mercurial. [1] http://hgbook.red-bean.com/ http://hgbook.red-bean.com/ [2] http://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki http://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
- steve_adams_86 7y ago
  In my limited experience with Hg, I thought it had a well designed, human-friendly interface. After a decade with git, I still feel like it's an ugly, awkward tool that just gets the job done and I still occasionally make weird mistakes with it. I'm not sure that's the case with other tools I've been using this long. Git has a pretty gross interface, such that people have struggled to make it nicer to use with GUIs for as long as I can remember. I also feel as though every junior developer has panic inducing moments with git where they think they've lost work or something terrifying like that. It's like a hazing ritual in programming. Wait for git to give you a heart attack. If you survive, you're one of us. Hg didn't really give me that impression at all and I was excited to begin using it more, but like with most technologies I want to adopt, work and family won and I stuck with git at work and otherwise had no time to use Hg more. It seems like git won largely because it has the right buy-in from the right people.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
PeterStuer 7y ago
I honestly would have been surprised if Sourcehut shunned Bitbucket refugees. Water is wet, news at 11?
cowwoc 7y ago
It's not clear how to send you feedback and/or ask questions, so I created a new sourcehut tag on Stackoverflow and posted my first question: https://stackoverflow.com/q/57628020/14731 https://stackoverflow.com/q/57628020/14731 Looking forward to hearing more about your service. Thank you.
- VictorSCushman 7y ago
  I believe Drew is responsive to email at his (work?) email address sir@cmpwn.com. You may want to send him a message directly.
reddotr 7y ago
Is it possible to reconsider the decision on status codes for unauthorized access to private repositories: https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3C20190407161316.mb644ldmmqtis6br%40kazhap.dbalan.in%3E https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3C2019040716131... ? It's actually a drawback.
thrownaway954 7y ago
why you would want to continue to use Mercurial at this point is beyond me. Pull the plug and just switch over to git already. People make a big deal out of it.
NetOpWibby 7y ago
I found Sourcehut extremely confusing to self-host so I went with RhodeCode recently. Prior to this I tried cgit (I really like how it looks) and gitolite. I even bought a book on gitolite configuration and couldn’t figure that out. Oh well. On topic, it’s great that Mercurial users have an alternative that’s not Github.

412 points by ddevault 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

nik736 7y ago

How was this upvoted so often without a single comment?

arghwhat 7y ago
Commentary is not needed to be interesting. There may not be much to add.
high_derivative 7y ago
My guess would be because HN likes sourcehut's open source approach (I still read it as 'Sir Hat') since its announcement on here. There are some projects that HN as a community tends to like and upvote just for visibility without feeling the need to comment on it.
rightbyte 7y ago
Bots? I have a hard time beleiving that a paid service has a silent fanbase. But maybe they do.
- shakna 7y ago
  I'm a paying user. Beyond the article there's not much to say.
- sirn 7y ago
  I am one. Happy paying user, upvoted sourcehut's posts because I like to support independent services, but rarely commented.
  - rightbyte 7y ago
    Ok never mind then.
- asdkhadsj 7y ago
  I'm a wanting-to-be paying user, fwiw. It goes against some of Sourcehut's fundamentals, but I'm waiting for a basic PR UI system, because frankly I just don't like email that much. (though strangely, I love the model of email). Regardless, I adore the goals of the service and the approach, so my plan is to move all my public and private projects there once I can use a PR-UI/etc - and pay, of course.
  - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
    I think you should give email its fair shake. There's a good tutorial here: https://git-send-email.io https://git-send-email.io And the video on this website shows you how the maintainer side could work: https://aerc-mail.org https://aerc-mail.org And remember, the email client you use for hacking needn't be the same as your everyday client.
    - ianamartin 7y ago
      Huh. That never occurred to me. To use a different client for workflow email. That was sort of one of the things keeping me from trying this out for real. I was just, "Ugh, I don't want all that mixed up together." Even folders don't help that much because my main email client is already managing a ton of email accounts. I'll have to give this idea a shot now. Thanks!
roryrjb 7y ago
Beyond what sourcehut is providing, I would also upvote because of Drew (Sir_Cmpwn). I don't know him personally, but based on blog posts, HN comments and interaction via email, he seems to be very helpful and polite, my general impression is that this isn't the norm in open source.
pjc50 7y ago
That's a good sign. Comments usually signal quibbling to outrage; there's no culture of "me too" (in the AOL sense, not the sexual assault one!) here.

zaarn 7y ago

This looks suspiciously like a spam campaign to fish for users desperate enough to go anywhere but bitbucket.

arghwhat 7y ago
BitBucket is discontinuing Mercurial, forcing users thereof to jump ship. Sourcehut is just doing a bit of marketing around their continued support for those needing new hosting.
Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
That's... really rude. Sourcehut has been around for a while: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=sourcehut&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?query=sourcehut&sort=byPopularity&pr...
- zaarn 7y ago
  Doesn't mean you're not fishing for users there.
  - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
    Isn't literally everyone fishing for users? Relax dude. People need somewhere to go and maybe they'll find Sourcehut suitable to their needs. I don't know what your definition of spam is but this definitely doesn't qualify for my (unusually strict) definition of it.
    - zaarn 7y ago
      Well, the page contains nothing but a tool to import data from a competitor in order to get users of the competitor to sign up for your service. That meets my definition of spam to a certain extend.
      - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
        The competitor is leaving the market, which hardly makes them a competitor at all. Any users who don't want to be left out in the cold need tools like this.

tstusr20190823 7y ago

Am I the only one who can't find the source of this "open source software"? How they can beat Bitbucket while they hide the code under unusable UI?

rgoulter 7y ago
> Where is the source? The homepage links to https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/?search=sr.ht https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/?search=sr.ht (EDIT: which is now also the URL in the blogpost with the link text "100% open source software") There are also Hg repos at hg.sr.ht; idk how easy it is to find git.sr.ht from hg.sr.ht. > how can they beat Bitbucket while the code is unusable Well, for Hg users, it's not like there's going to be much of a choice in a year (given BB is sunsetting Hg support), right?
- tstusr20190823 7y ago
  Mercurial users can use their builtin Web UI unlike Git users
  - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
    git has gitweb: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-GitWeb But in both cases, the user has to have a server to put it on, making services like Sourcehut and Bitbucket (may it rest in peace) useful.
    - tstusr20190823 7y ago
      gitweb requires server setup, while Mercurial web ui can quickly start locally without any configuration and that was the one of mercurial selling point until github and other services arrives.
      - Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
        `git instaweb` is sufficient to get a working gitweb stood up.

einpoklum 7y ago

Am I the only one who reads that as "source chute"? Also - nice initiative, I guess, but I have to say their web UI seems to be stuck in the 1990s.

vnorilo 7y ago
I'm currently considering moving from bitbucket to sourcehut. Another way sr.ht is stuck in the 1990s is that it doesn't bludgeon my browser with analytics and gazillion requests like a certain bucket was fond of doing. In general, sr.ht seems simple, in a very positive way. AFAICT, it doesn't try to compete with the GitHub-ish web UI for pull requests and code review. Personally, I don't mind.
interfixus 7y ago
> their web UI seems to be stuck in the 1990s To some of us decidedly a feature, not a bug. And: > All features work without JavaScript My endless upvote.
- s_Hogg 7y ago
  I just went for a look because of your JS remark and holy moses that's a fast site. I still sometimes forget how slow stuff is relative to what's possible, even though I frequent HN.
Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
The goal is to be simple and easy to use. The UI should get out of your way ASAP - you're there to get things done, not to gawk at the pretty UI. As a bonus, it's very fast and small, easy on your web browser even on old computers or slow internet connections. And it's not spying on you! That being said, I have been working on conservative improvements to make it a little bit more pleasing to the eye, without sacrificing the principles behind it. More color, for example, is not going to be added, or will be added cautiously, because color is used sparingly to attract your eye to the most common reason you would come to a page. Each element of the page should be intuitive and have purpose before it's pretty.
- 7y ago

einpoklum 7y ago

When you register, you notice that: > Notice: sr.ht is currently in alpha, and the quality of the service reflects that. As such, payment is currently optional, and only encouraged for users who want to support the ongoing development of the site. Caveat emptor.

ddevault 7y ago
For more details on what the alpha entails, see also: https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/ https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/
- Operyl 7y ago
  Is that page in a repo somewhere? There’s a typo or two to fix.
  - fabrixxm 7y ago
    https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut.org/tree/master/content/alpha-details.md https://git.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sourcehut.org/tree/master/conten...

viach 7y ago

They violently break all the recent frontend best practices. Where is the React or Vie, SPA architecture, tons of JS? There should be a federal law prohibiting making fast and simple UIs so that nobody will have concerns that the UI frameworks war leads us to great future.

vnorilo 7y ago
There’s not even any analytics or trackers. The shame!
- panpanna 7y ago
  And no non-standard fonts on some random CDN. My eyes are bleeding
- yk 7y ago
  Perhaps one could use greasemonkey to inject Google analytics into arbitrary sites. (And load some font, and perhaps have a 20 second timeout somewhere.)
  - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    Reverse-reader view! Isn't there a bookmarklet that Geocities-ifies pages somewhere, same idea.
  - buildzr 7y ago
    Don't forget Facebook like buttons, those really need to be front and center on every page.
  - bald42 7y ago
    No worries the snakeoil antivirus suites already does that for you ;-)
- rutthenut 7y ago
  These comments put me in mind of https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ and http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://perfectmotherfuckingwebsite.com/

mikl 7y ago

…all five of them ;)

lpcvoid 7y ago

This is how websites should always be. Great job!

ulkesh 7y ago

Serious questions... What does mercurial offer that git doesn’t? Is the transition to git difficult for projects currently housed in a mercurial repository?

nbevans 7y ago
For one thing it offers a far cleaner user experience than Git does.
- foxhop 7y ago
  AKA the commands actually make sense, and they have sane defaults so you don't have to remember 100+ random flags.
  - jgraham 7y ago
    People always claim this in mercurial posts, but it's really hard to tell to what extent this is just that people who are using hg all the time are familiar with the hg commands and so don't notice the problems any more. As a irregular hg user, I frequently run into (or help others with) issues with the ui, like "why does `hg log require `-f` to do something useful", "how do I refer to the current head commit (protip: it's not `tip`)", "how do I see changes relative to a branch (bookmark) on a remote" and "which set of commands am I supposed to use for history rewriting nowadays and how do they work?". hg has some nice features, but the idea that it's got a fully intuitive and uniformly well designed interface is, in my experience, a total myth. Which isn't to say that git has a great CLI of course, just that the extent to which hg is better in this area is often overstated.
    - WorldMaker 7y ago
      I think it's also at least somewhat the case that hg had a great CLI when it launched and git had an abysmal CLI when it launched, but over the years and counting "necessary" hg extensions, they've both sort of converged more towards the middle: git's has only gotten better (and really only had room to get better) and hg's has mostly stayed the same, if not slowly gotten worse from the additional "overhead" of extensions. Which is that the difference between the CLIs in the early days were stark contrasts of good and bad, but now they both seem about equally mediocre, but in different ways, when directly contrasted. (Especially with the latest git release finally splitting checkout into switch and restore, they are really on increasingly similar footing.)

whatshisface 7y ago

People seem pretty interested in keeping their pre-git source control system, even if it means switching repository hosts. I know the default attitude is "they're just curmudgeons who don't want to change," but Hg could have some advantages.

wilsonnb3 7y ago
Mercurial shouldn't be considered a pre-git source control system. It's initial release date was actually 12 days after git and it is far more comparable to git than it is to SVN and other pre-git version control systems.
- BeetleB 7y ago
  I think he meant "the source control they used before using git" - not that it came out first.
  - krupan 7y ago
    But there really are people that purposefully went from git to hg. Calling hg a "pre-git" version control system makes some assumptions that just aren't true.
foxhop 7y ago
For me, I started using Hg before I started using Git, so I have about as many Hg repos as Git repos. I also started using Bitbucket, back when that was the only option (they didn't have git support until Atlassian bought them). I have no personal desire to transform these Hg repos into Git. That just seems like busy work. Bitbucket is causing work for me (granted I never paid them a dime over these last 10+ years, so I have nothing to complain about). My choices are to migrate these repos from Hg to git, or move hosts. I'm pretty sure I'm going to move hosts, seems like less work.
juped 7y ago
If you can avoid inflicting a painful VCS migration on yourself, you probably should.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

doubleunplussed 7y ago

I am looking to preserve the pull requests and corresponding comment threads from bitbucket. I'm thinking the way to go might be to save static HTML of the pages and host them somewhere, modifying the links to issues to point to migrated ones, and links to PRs to the hosted pages. Anyone else thinking of trying this approach? Advice, criticism?

Sir_Cmpwn 7y ago
At some point it should be possible to adjust the import script to also generate an mbox of pull requests discussions and import it into lists.sr.ht, but that's a lot more complicated. Happy to talk over the details if anyone is interested in taking a crack at this.

jtr1 7y ago

Doesn't it seems like a bit of an abuse of language to refer to former bitbucket users as "refugees"?

flyingfences 7y ago
It's a commonly used figure of speech.
- jtr1 7y ago
  Lifelong english speaker, American. Never heard this one in software until today.
jason_s 7y ago
no, because like real-world refugees, we are left to flee Atlassian without an obvious place to relocate.
- stjohnswarts 7y ago
  I so wish my company would ditch them and use opensource alternatives. I'm so tired of feeding of the beast, yet we just get deeper and deeper in.
stjohnswarts 7y ago
No I would say it's a little snarky but in a time of overuse of political correctness that every little bit of rebellion helps.

ourlordcaffeine 7y ago

There are dozens of us who use Mercurial! Dozens!

eigenhombre 7y ago

Starting using Sourcehut a few days ago for two repos and have had a good experience so far (being a new paid user is my only affiliation with sr.ht): - Very clean, simple UI/UX providing deceptively rich feature set - A build system among the easiest I've used - Solid, straightforward documentation Currently it's a little slow to push to repos but the creator says it's a known problem with ongoing regular improvements occurring. I'm a long time GitHub user with many repos there and there are lots of GH features I like (like Org Mode READMEs). But I'm a big fan of this sort of business model: someone puts together a simple, solid, independent service; I pay a small amount monthly/yearly (I chose to pay voluntarily even though it's currently optional). I hope this service thrives.

ulisesrmzroche 7y ago

So what happened to Bitbucket? Don't got any opinion either way, just wondering about the "refugee" part

t0astbread 7y ago
They're dropping support for Mercurial: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitbucket#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitbucket#History
teh_klev 7y ago
See previous: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20745393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20745393 https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-b...

jammygit 7y ago

I tried sourcehut a while ago but I found the pull request flow to be confusing. There aren’t actual pull requests but instead some sort of email flow that I didn’t have time to figure out. If there was a video walkthrough for the process, it would help people like me get the ball rolling faster

vangale 7y ago
There's no video (that I know of) but Sourcehut has put up a website with a set of steps/instructions for email based pull requests: https://git-send-email.io/ https://git-send-email.io/

todd3834 7y ago

I literally forgot about Mercurial. It’s been years since I’ve even heard it mentioned. Are there any strong arguments for using it over Git these days? Is this just about supporting legacy code bases. I’m sure there must be a way to migrate to Git [and maintain history]. I’m not trolling, I would love to hear from someone who prefers Mercurial over Git as to how it benefits them.

dragonsh 7y ago
Our company use mercurial and we are very happy with it. Mercurial has evolved and it's UI is still better than git. We use it due to following reasons: 1. Very easy to use and very well documented with a book.[1] 2. Mercurial good python philosophy of "explicit is better than implicit". This means every merge also needs to explicitly committed preserving history. Our team likes it. 3. Better multi-platform support. 4. Easy to extend to fit specific workflow. 5. Just run hg serve and access a beautiful web interface to review code. No need of external tools. In this aspect though fossil-scm [2] is ahead of both git and mercurial. [1] http://hgbook.red-bean.com/ http://hgbook.red-bean.com/ [2] http://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki http://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki
steve_adams_86 7y ago
In my limited experience with Hg, I thought it had a well designed, human-friendly interface. After a decade with git, I still feel like it's an ugly, awkward tool that just gets the job done and I still occasionally make weird mistakes with it. I'm not sure that's the case with other tools I've been using this long. Git has a pretty gross interface, such that people have struggled to make it nicer to use with GUIs for as long as I can remember. I also feel as though every junior developer has panic inducing moments with git where they think they've lost work or something terrifying like that. It's like a hazing ritual in programming. Wait for git to give you a heart attack. If you survive, you're one of us. Hg didn't really give me that impression at all and I was excited to begin using it more, but like with most technologies I want to adopt, work and family won and I stuck with git at work and otherwise had no time to use Hg more. It seems like git won largely because it has the right buy-in from the right people.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

PeterStuer 7y ago

I honestly would have been surprised if Sourcehut shunned Bitbucket refugees. Water is wet, news at 11?

cowwoc 7y ago

It's not clear how to send you feedback and/or ask questions, so I created a new sourcehut tag on Stackoverflow and posted my first question: https://stackoverflow.com/q/57628020/14731 https://stackoverflow.com/q/57628020/14731 Looking forward to hearing more about your service. Thank you.

VictorSCushman 7y ago
I believe Drew is responsive to email at his (work?) email address sir@cmpwn.com. You may want to send him a message directly.

reddotr 7y ago

Is it possible to reconsider the decision on status codes for unauthorized access to private repositories: https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3C20190407161316.mb644ldmmqtis6br%40kazhap.dbalan.in%3E https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3C2019040716131... ? It's actually a drawback.

thrownaway954 7y ago

why you would want to continue to use Mercurial at this point is beyond me. Pull the plug and just switch over to git already. People make a big deal out of it.

NetOpWibby 7y ago

I found Sourcehut extremely confusing to self-host so I went with RhodeCode recently. Prior to this I tried cgit (I really like how it looks) and gitolite. I even bought a book on gitolite configuration and couldn’t figure that out. Oh well. On topic, it’s great that Mercurial users have an alternative that’s not Github.