2013/12/19 Marc Schlaich <[email protected]>:
> I know Mercurial pretty well (actually better than git). However, I find it
> really inconvenient for a reviewed pull request process due to the lack of
> rebase -i for published commits. Plus, GitHub adds some nice features like
> Travis. Maybe there could be an automatically synced mirror?
Why would you rewrite the history for published commits? It sounds
like a bad idea, even for Git. In fact, you can rewrite the history in
Mercurial, even for published commits, but again it's a bad idea ("hg
phase -f -d REV").
I never used Travis. There are other free (and non-free) continious
integration services for Bitbucket, just one example:
https://drone.io/
Victor
