Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> writes: > The GUIs for things like browsing commits, viewing diffs, etc are pretty > similar in capability and each is sufficiently intuitive (after a brief > learning curve) that I don't find I need any conscious effort to "mode > switch" between their use. The ability to comment on commits in lieu of > the ticket system is a good feature, for instance, that "just works" in > both systems.
One concern is that those commits appearing in the release repository won't have the comments from the development repository. So if you use the comments and pull requests for debugging and discussion, you would be better off with one repository so that you don't have to keep switching repositories (in your browser) to access that metadata. PETSc uses bitbucket mostly because it lets us unify our ACLs. All our source code is open, but we use private repositories for proposals and (sometimes) papers. We have *.edu addresses, so there is no charge. I'm a happy user of both github and bitbucket and think either will work for your purposes.
pgp7HMEm270Ph.pgp
Description: PGP signature
