a no cost alternative would be to update sourceforge with all the history, then convert to hg. though, like bzr, once something gets into the repo it tends to stick. by starting a google code project, an import from another repo could be used to start hg with full history.
bitbucket can be excruciatingly slow, at least on a dialup and there is a limit to project members for the free repo, but I have no idea if that is still true or what the cost is to jump to the next number of developers. they do implement the hg server so anyone can get an archive of any changeset. sourceforge and google code don't. mercurial is also a distributed RCS. I used bzr a little locally but happily switched to hg when the euphoria project switched from svn to hg. tortoiseHG on windows is well ahead in usability of anything I could find available for bzr or git for a GUI solution on windows. the commandline client will not be terribly different than bzr to understand or use. I'm guessing launchpad has been slow enough to make people avoid using the bug tracker to full advantage. the bitbucket bug tracker uses a wiki markup, "creole" that will be a bit of a learning curve for people but worth the effort. it shouldn't be to difficult to translate from Rst to creole. google code also has a capable wiki and issue tracker on every project as well as download server. On Nov 10, 3:53 pm, "Ville M. Vainio" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Terry Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Different IDs for commits is ok - so all comments and tags on commits > > remain the same, right? > > Yes, according to my understanding. > > >> Using github has crossed my mind. What do you think? > > > What are the advantages apart from git having more dev-cred :-) > > > bzr is written in python, after all... > > Mercurial would seem more sensible alternative, it's as easy to use as > bzr. Github is a great service, but that may not be worth the learning > curve for using git. Mercurial is also better supported on windows, > git on windows is a hack. > > I use git for all my stuff these days, and like it, but there > definitely is the learning curve. > > Main advantage of both git and hg over bzr is performance. Both do > almost everything in a blink of an eye, with bzr you have to wait > around. Popularity could also be a factor in the choice, don't know. > Mercurial has a quite professional gui tool, > Tortoisehg:http://tortoisehg.bitbucket.org/. Mercurial also has very cool > extra > tools / extensions like Mercurial Queues for patch management. > > If we were to change over to, say, bitbucket and hg, we should still > keep the launchpad project as bug tracking area. > > The thing to do now would probably be for Edward to play around with > hg/git/both, and make the call. I could obviously help with the > repository migration, if a change is deemed necessary / useful. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en.
