5 ms·

Yay, a major project using hg instead of git. This makes it seem like my work on hg is still worth something (as are the pull requests I have sent to pygments).

by jordigh 12y ago

Yay, a major project using hg instead of git. This makes it seem like my work on hg is still worth something (as are the pull requests I have sent to pygments). Btw, the next hg sprint will be at Pycon in Montréal! http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/3.4sprint http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/3.4sprint

the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
> Yay, a major project using hg instead of git. This makes it seem like my work on hg is still worth something (as are the pull requests I have sent to pygments). Mostly because nobody spend time to make the move. All other pocoo projects move to git (Flask, Werkzeug, Jinja2, Click, Sphinx, etc.).
- jordigh 12y ago
  Aw. So you have no intent on staying with hg? I thought Georg Brandl was a big hg fan. :-( And hg is so cool! Templates! Revsets! Evolve! Extensibility! http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/customising-mercurial-like-a-pro/ http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/customising-mercurial-l... https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NSLvERZQSok#t=973 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NSLv... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OlDm3akbqg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OlDm3akbqg http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/x-men-in-mercurial-evolve/ http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/x-men-in-mercurial-evol...
  - DasIch 12y ago
    Whether or not hg is good or even better than git is pretty much irrelevant at this point. Github's popularity has made all other project hosting platforms irrelevant. Git's popularity means that every potential contributor knows how to use it, which significantly reduces friction for new ones.
    - jordigh 12y ago
      I don't buy the popularity argument. If I were to abandon software just because it wasn't as popular as the alternative, I would have to stop working on GNU Octave in favour of Matlab, and I would have to wipe GNU/Linux from my machines and just use Mac OS X or Windows. I understand that git transcends organisation, programming languages, and operating systems. I still don't want to be stuck to the git way of doing things, no matter how popular it is. Concessions have to be made for git users coming to hg, but there are some things that hg does that git just will probably never be able to. I may one day work on improving hgit, which is an hg front-end to a git storage backend proof-of-concept, but so far the hg-git workaround for git's popularity is good enough for most purposes.
      - DasIch 12y ago
        Popularity is a strong argument. It's however not the only argument. In the case of git and hg popularity is important because the other arguments are too weak to matter in comparision. That's not the case for GNU Octave or Linux. Those offer significant financial, ideological and technical benefits over alternatives. Benefits a large part of their user base actually cares about. Hg doesn't have that luxury. Git is simply good enough and hg is not good enough to offset the cost for choosing the unpopular option.
    - stephenr 12y ago
      By this logic, Java and .net and php and sql are all irrelevant because all the cool kids use nodejs and mongodb, right? The HN crowd loves to chase what's "trendy" without thought for if it's a good fit for their problem. GitHub frankly is a terrible solution for anything but an open source project, and even then there are plenty of better alternatives. if your project relies on the popularity of GitHub to attract contributors I would be more worried about the nature of your contributors than where the code is hosted.
      - DasIch 12y ago
        Not at all. Java, .NET, PHP and SQL all offer features that Node.JS and MongoDB do not. I also don't think that GitHub is a universally perfect solution. It's clearly not and I never said they were. Using GitHub's popularity as a marketing measure is also not a binary choice between not using it at all and relying on it completely.
  - the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
    > Aw. So you have no intent on staying with hg? I thought Georg Brandl was a big hg fan. :-( I don't know, but he moved Sphinx to git a month ago or so :)
maccard 12y ago
Mozilla still uses hg for their source control
- jordigh 12y ago
  As does Facebook, Google, and Python and a few not as big players. I've also heard rumours that the Facebook devs are trying to help other big companies move slow, gigantic git repos to faster gigantic hg repos. Still, it's a bit hard for me to keep my chin up over hg when everyone seems to think that git is the ultimate word on DVCSes with no room for dissenting software. It warms my heart whenever I see another project using hg for real and not half-heartedly like Golang was doing... and now they're using git half-heartedly, oh well.
  - drostie 12y ago
    For what it's worth, I think Hg is an easier sell to mid-size companies transitioning from SVN to a DVCS. With Git, you need to absorb a certain "git mentality" to really understand what all of the commands are; with Hg it seems like I just need to say "you COMMIT and UPDATE from this hidden folder on your drive, then you PUSH and PULL from that hidden folder to these other hidden folders in other places." If it makes you feel better, at one point at this job I replayed a bunch of SVN changes through Hg because there were a bunch of independent updates that needed to be grouped into different branches, so that I could finally find out that the cause of the bugs in the code was that someone had changed `if (x == "true")` statements into `if (x)` statements...
    - jordigh 12y ago
      Thanks, that does make me feel better. :-)

by jordigh 12y ago

the_mitsuhiko 12y ago

> Yay, a major project using hg instead of git. This makes it seem like my work on hg is still worth something (as are the pull requests I have sent to pygments). Mostly because nobody spend time to make the move. All other pocoo projects move to git (Flask, Werkzeug, Jinja2, Click, Sphinx, etc.).

jordigh 12y ago
Aw. So you have no intent on staying with hg? I thought Georg Brandl was a big hg fan. :-( And hg is so cool! Templates! Revsets! Evolve! Extensibility! http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/customising-mercurial-like-a-pro/ http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/customising-mercurial-l... https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NSLvERZQSok#t=973 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=NSLv... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OlDm3akbqg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OlDm3akbqg http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/x-men-in-mercurial-evolve/ http://jordi.inversethought.com/blog/x-men-in-mercurial-evol...
- DasIch 12y ago
  Whether or not hg is good or even better than git is pretty much irrelevant at this point. Github's popularity has made all other project hosting platforms irrelevant. Git's popularity means that every potential contributor knows how to use it, which significantly reduces friction for new ones.
  - jordigh 12y ago
    I don't buy the popularity argument. If I were to abandon software just because it wasn't as popular as the alternative, I would have to stop working on GNU Octave in favour of Matlab, and I would have to wipe GNU/Linux from my machines and just use Mac OS X or Windows. I understand that git transcends organisation, programming languages, and operating systems. I still don't want to be stuck to the git way of doing things, no matter how popular it is. Concessions have to be made for git users coming to hg, but there are some things that hg does that git just will probably never be able to. I may one day work on improving hgit, which is an hg front-end to a git storage backend proof-of-concept, but so far the hg-git workaround for git's popularity is good enough for most purposes.
    - DasIch 12y ago
      Popularity is a strong argument. It's however not the only argument. In the case of git and hg popularity is important because the other arguments are too weak to matter in comparision. That's not the case for GNU Octave or Linux. Those offer significant financial, ideological and technical benefits over alternatives. Benefits a large part of their user base actually cares about. Hg doesn't have that luxury. Git is simply good enough and hg is not good enough to offset the cost for choosing the unpopular option.
  - stephenr 12y ago
    By this logic, Java and .net and php and sql are all irrelevant because all the cool kids use nodejs and mongodb, right? The HN crowd loves to chase what's "trendy" without thought for if it's a good fit for their problem. GitHub frankly is a terrible solution for anything but an open source project, and even then there are plenty of better alternatives. if your project relies on the popularity of GitHub to attract contributors I would be more worried about the nature of your contributors than where the code is hosted.
    - DasIch 12y ago
      Not at all. Java, .NET, PHP and SQL all offer features that Node.JS and MongoDB do not. I also don't think that GitHub is a universally perfect solution. It's clearly not and I never said they were. Using GitHub's popularity as a marketing measure is also not a binary choice between not using it at all and relying on it completely.
- the_mitsuhiko 12y ago
  > Aw. So you have no intent on staying with hg? I thought Georg Brandl was a big hg fan. :-( I don't know, but he moved Sphinx to git a month ago or so :)

maccard 12y ago

Mozilla still uses hg for their source control

jordigh 12y ago
As does Facebook, Google, and Python and a few not as big players. I've also heard rumours that the Facebook devs are trying to help other big companies move slow, gigantic git repos to faster gigantic hg repos. Still, it's a bit hard for me to keep my chin up over hg when everyone seems to think that git is the ultimate word on DVCSes with no room for dissenting software. It warms my heart whenever I see another project using hg for real and not half-heartedly like Golang was doing... and now they're using git half-heartedly, oh well.
- drostie 12y ago
  For what it's worth, I think Hg is an easier sell to mid-size companies transitioning from SVN to a DVCS. With Git, you need to absorb a certain "git mentality" to really understand what all of the commands are; with Hg it seems like I just need to say "you COMMIT and UPDATE from this hidden folder on your drive, then you PUSH and PULL from that hidden folder to these other hidden folders in other places." If it makes you feel better, at one point at this job I replayed a bunch of SVN changes through Hg because there were a bunch of independent updates that needed to be grouped into different branches, so that I could finally find out that the cause of the bugs in the code was that someone had changed `if (x == "true")` statements into `if (x)` statements...
  - jordigh 12y ago
    Thanks, that does make me feel better. :-)