On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:08:09AM -0700, Manuel Ortega wrote: > There are a lot of people saying "Github is better than Bitbucket for reasons > XYZ, therefore we should move to Github". > > The problem is that moving to Github means Bram and the rest of us have to > switch to git. The problem here is not git itself, but the switching. The > path of minimum modification, and minimum risk of messing something up, is to > just go to some host that supports mercurial. > > The fact that someone has a Vim clone on GH already is irrelevant. Bram > would still have to learn how to use git and make his rookie mistakes (which > would affect all of us). Even if Bram makes no mistakes, the rest of us who > barely know how to "git pull" would still have our workflows messed up, and > have to make our own rookie mistakes.[1] > > OTOH, all of us already know enough about Hg to get by, and the whole thing > could be solved in five minutes by creating a BB (or wherever) account and > then nobody has to change anything except the URL for the repo.
++. Seems to me that moving vim to another source repo host should be done in phases. First, move the vim repo to a host that supports Mercurial which limits the issues to those specific to the new host (say Bitbucket). Then after things are stable and if it seems worth the effort should vim be migrated to a different type of version control. -- Will Fiveash Oracle Solaris Software Engineer -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
