On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 11:04:59AM -0700, David Champion wrote: > OK - that's a good track to have. The thing that made me think otherwise > was the removal of hg-related components. Kevin has the final say now > but we've never discussed moving to git, and I don't see what doing > so would accomplish particularly other than allow/make people use one > hosting system instead of another.
I'm actually not as against this as you might think. It's pretty clear git has won the popularity war, and there is some benefit in using a vcs that most developers are familiar with. However, there are some strong arguments for not changing. Our infrastructure and workflows are working quite nicely (thanks Brendan!), and I'm not anxious to redo them all. Mercurial is easy to use, and I'm skeptical it's *that* hard for anyone who's used git to pick up the basics. (Going the other way isn't quite as easy, imo). Our history, tickets, and changelog entries often reference mercurial changesets, which would be a loss (not insurmountable, I know). Also, Mercurial is still under active development. If the pluses and minuses started to weigh heavily against Mercurial, I'd be open to the discussion, but I don't think we're there just yet. For now I'd suggest keeping focused on maintaining and increasing the project momentum. -- Kevin J. McCarthy GPG Fingerprint: 8975 A9B3 3AA3 7910 385C 5308 ADEF 7684 8031 6BDA http://www.8t8.us/configs/gpg-key-transition-statement.txt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
