5 ms·

Small tangent, but what happened with the alternatives? I hear that Mercurial is having a good time at Meta and Google, but hard to find reliable repo hosting.

• fleg 4y ago
  FWIW, SourceHut offers Mercurial hosting.
  • openplatypus 4y ago
    From the site: Notice: sr.ht is currently in alpha, and the quality of the service may reflect that. :( I miss Kiln from FogBugz (yes, it was years ago)
    • zephyr9 4y ago
      SourceHut is more reliable than GitHub. I mean this in the truest sense of the word, I can rely on SourceHut not to act against my interests, both ideologically and just basic usefulness.
      • seanw444 4y ago
        Agreed. Moved all my stuff from GitHub to Sourcehut. Haven't looked back. Well, okay, I look at the trending repos and star some that are interesting, but I don't host my personal projects on there.
      • dist1ll 4y ago
        I thought so too at first, until the owner changed their TOS to forbid all crypto and blockchain related projects, essentially kicking me off their platform. So no, it's not reliable. The platform is at the behest of a small group of ideologists, who might change their stance on any topic on a whim. GitHub on the contrary continues to host code that has been OFAC sanctioned. I'd rather stay with them.
        • still_grokking 4y ago
          Moment, what? SourceHut bans customers purely on ideological grounds? If true, this would change my opinion about this service diametrically. That would result in: Never ever make business with them.
          • nix23 4y ago
            https://sourcehut.org/blog/2022-10-31-tos-update-cryptocurrency/ https://sourcehut.org/blog/2022-10-31-tos-update-cryptocurre... Yes, it's a really bad move, you pay for the service but the nature of your code is not welcomed. Like you i was a bit shocked too...well and a bit sad since i was thinking that a hosting i pay for should give me more freedom and not less, and that code(knowledge?) should be free.
            • mariusor 4y ago
              I think you're mixing up what "freedom" is in regards to open source. Sourcehut's code gives a user the freedom to use it for whatever they want - including hosting their own crypto-currency projects. sr.ht the "service" on the other hand is not required to do a thing and denying users the ability to host those projects doesn't contradict any licence the code has been released under.
              • still_grokking 4y ago
                The point isn't any license. The point is that's it's not the business of a hoster to decide what people may host. A hoster gets money for hosting things. Ideally the hoster does not even know what he's hosting. (Until there is a problem with that that someone else points out to the hoster; which the hoster should than just ignore in case this someone isn't an authority with a valid court order in hands). As a parallel: Just imagine your ISP would start to filter the web sites you may visit based on some arbitrary ideological believes. That's more or less the same to what's happening on SourceHut, imho.
                • 4y ago
• charcircuit 4y ago
  Meta has Sapling https://sapling-scm.com/ https://sapling-scm.com/ which is also compatible with git servers. Google uses Piper which is not public
  • lima 4y ago
    Most of Google. Some projects like Android and Chromium are developed outside google3 and use Git (with Gerrit). IIRC, Git is also relatively popular as a local Piper frontend.
  • IshKebab 4y ago
    Facebook have been the only major users of Mercurial for years. Sapling is basically their rewrite of it.
  • loeg 4y ago
    Mononoke/EdenFS (mentioned in Sapling's Github README) are Meta's in-house mercurial stack. The "Sapling" name is not used internally but "hg" is.