2 ms·
It's not a pedantic point. Since the relationship between the references is wrong (SCM <> hosting service), one can't do an analysis. Putting it in those terms
by pizza234 6y ago
It's not a pedantic point. Since the relationship between the references is wrong (SCM <> hosting service), one can't do an analysis.
Putting it in those terms, questions like the storage requirements of an SCM can't be answered (because GH is a hosting service) and usability of a hosting service can't be answered either (because Mercurial is an SCM). Ultimately, it doesn't allow the fundamental question to be answered - was it a matter of SCM, of hosting service, or both?
As a matter of fact, the article is imprecise/confusing, as it partly mixes issues that were originally separate (although later it expands on this).
See the two separate JEPs:
- [JEP 357: Migrate from Mercurial to Git](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/357 https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/357)
- [JEP 369: Migrate to GitHub](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/369 https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/369)
Based on a quick reading, the main driver has been the SCM.
- spareaccnt1024 6y agoWhat's wrong with you people downvoting answers that merely give an opposing view in a non-condescending way. Jeez, this site should remove those buttons.
- zbuf 6y agoI should have put a smiley face on the pedantry comment... I get what you're saying, and if this project in question just wants a "hosting service" and to never touch any of its features, then ok. But the broader point is that these are not hosting services; they're full-on toolsets and workflows that people are migrating to (or towards, in this case).