On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 02:40:20PM +0100, Matthew Revell wrote: > On 17 May 2012 23:45, Jelmer Vernooij <jel...@canonical.com> wrote: > > It doesn't look like anybody is going to be working on bzr-hg soon. > > There are 40 working imports versus 170 failing at the moment [1], and > > a little over a dozen bugs open about it. > I'd like to talk to the people who requested those 40 successful > imports but I think we'd gain more in terms of polish and maintenance > cost reduction by killing Hg imports than we gain from those imports.
They are (in the order that the imports were created): https://launchpad.net/~jelmer/ (hi!) https://launchpad.net/~gregor-muellegger https://launchpad.net/~chazz https://launchpad.net/~jml https://launchpad.net/~mwhudson https://launchpad.net/~vladimir.kolev https://launchpad.net/~youversion4china-translators https://launchpad.net/~quartz25 https://launchpad.net/~andrea.corbellini https://launchpad.net/~russel https://launchpad.net/~veger https://launchpad.net/~happyaron https://launchpad.net/~dialtone https://launchpad.net/~dns https://launchpad.net/~ripps818 https://launchpad.net/~lakshmi7977 https://launchpad.net/~djfroofy https://launchpad.net/~renatosilva https://launchpad.net/~danilobuzar https://launchpad.net/~kendfinger https://launchpad.net/~hrvojes https://launchpad.net/~lakshmi7977 https://launchpad.net/~stephane-mangin-l > > I would like to propose removing the existing hg support. I think we > > should remove rather than disable the hg import code because the > > existing bzr-hg code is likely to bitrot further (it depends on > > upstream Mercurial), and there isn't a lot of glue code in > > Launchpad anyway; we won't save all that much time by keeping it in if > > we want to reintroduce it later. Marking Mercurial imports as beta > > doesn't seem reasonable either given only a small minority finishes > > successfully anymore. > Yeah, a 23.5% success rate is embarrassing and I agree that slapping a > beta tag on it would be inappropriate. It was significantly better when we last discussed marking them beta, but things seem to've deteriorated quickly since. > >From a Product Manager PoV, I agree that we should remove Mercurial > imports but, as I say, I'd like to talk to the 40 lucky winners of the > import lottery before we do anything, to give them a chance to make > other arrangements etc. At the very least, they should be able to use bzr-hg locally. That should give them the same results as on Launchpad. bzr-hg is no longer in Ubuntu but installing it should be fairly simple ("bzr branch lp:bzr-hg ~/.bazaar/plugins/hg"). > > Another reason why I prefer to remove the existing HG support > > code is that eventually I would like to get rid of the type field in > > the CodeImport class. Bazaar has a mechanism for opening a branch - > > in any format - from a URL, so there isn't really a need for the user > > to specify the VCS to expect. Bazaar can find it out when it does the > > import. > > > > Doing this has some advantages: > > > > * it makes our UI simpler - users no longer have to choose the > > version control system to import from, they just have to fill in a > > single URL (perhaps with some javascript help for git branches/CVS > > modules) > > * it becomes possible to change the type of a CodeImport; at the > > moment the existing code import has to be removed and a new one > > added > > * it makes our code simpler - we can ditch a lot of code that is > > specific for svn, git, hg or bzr. > > * related to the previous point, this makes it easier to add (or > > remove) foreign branch plugins > > Any disadvantages? * If there are bugs in the probers (the code which checks if a particular VCS is present at a URL) we will now be affected by it. That said, these bug have been ironed out pretty well over the last couple of years because bzr users would hit them. * It becomes trickier to support different VCS repositories in different formats at the same URL. In other words, if a directory has a .git and a .bzr subdirectory we would import the Bazaar repository, not the git one. I haven't actually seen this kind of cohabitation in practice, and if it does happen users can always specify git+http://.../ or something like that. Cheers, Jelmer _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
