On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Greg Von Kuster <g...@bx.psu.edu> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Jun 16, 2011, at 10:10 AM, Peter Cock wrote: >>>> >>>> Are you expecting tool authors to work primarily at the hg level? >>>> >> >> You didn't answer that one ;) > > Not necessarily, but hg is the basis for uploading and downloading tools. > I'm not sure if it will be possible to completely eliminate the requirement > of a tool developer using hg, but we're making every attempt to do so.
Good. > > Why are you so averse to using hg? > Because git suits me better? ;) Seriously, I have no strong aversion to hg - what puts me off a little is the need to have one repo per tool or tool-suite, compared to my current setup where all by tools are in a branch from the main Galaxy repo. There would be a significant time and effort cost in switching, made worse by having multiple tools on the Tool Shed. I'm actually thinking of this (requiring hg knowledge) as a more general issue, namely a potential impediment to new Tool Shed contributors. Peter ___________________________________________________________ Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all" in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at: http://lists.bx.psu.edu/