21–30 of 183 posts
I use GitHub mainly for private repos. I think I will actually move my private repos over to Bitbucket. I really like GitHub Issues though. Does Bitbucket have anything similar? I don't see it on their site.
You can see one at https://bitbucket.org/jespern/django-piston/issues?status=ne...
Bitbucket (a popular mercurial hosting site) has added git support. Has any popular git hosting site added mercurial support? This shows which DVCS is winning.
Free unlimited private repos for up to 5 users; with competition like that maybe we'll see github improve it's pricing.
I doubt it. There is no need for them to, they aren't hurting or struggling. Running businesses with "lets offer more for free" and "ohh crap, they offer more for free, lets lower our price" is a race to the bottom. It is actually moves like these that make me question Bitbucket more. How viable is the service long term? Do I want to trust all my own code to them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They do support HG in a way. See http://hg-git.github.com/
I'll grant that only if you allow me to say that Linux runs Microsoft Office natively due to WINE.
It may not perform as well but I get to use what I want and still interoperate.
You know, I actually expected that the opposite would happen: GitHub would start offering Mercurial hosting. Because Git isn't what attracts most people to GitHub. It's the sheer fact that GitHub is frickin' HUGE and has lots of people who will show up, fork your project, and send you a pull request. I love Bitbucket, but honestly if GitHub added Mercurial support I would probably move all the way to GitHub because o…
This sums up my feelings exactly. I'm emphatically not a fan of the Github guys (who seem rather unprofessional), but the community is too big to ignore. I'll probably switch if/when they support hg, unless Atlassian can find a way to encourage a much more robust community in Bitbucket.
(And no, Github fans, hg-git is not "support" for hg.)
Bitbucket (a popular mercurial hosting site) has added git support. Has any popular git hosting site added mercurial support? This shows which DVCS is winning.
Yes. In fact Github implemented the Git plugin for Mercurial that lets you use Github (or any Git repository) with Mercurial as your client rather than Git.
I guess this shows which DVCS is winning?
store every line of code you’ve ever wrote in one place without paying a cent Great news (and thanks)! However, please s/wrote/written/ EDIT: I see they fixed the copy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll grant that only if you allow me to say that Linux runs Microsoft Office natively due to WINE.
no. That analogy doesn't fit here. A closer one would be more like Linux supporting FAT32 natively because someone took the time to write proper support for it in an system it wasn't originally designed for (and it works beautifully with almost no corner cases). It may not perform as well but I get to use what I want and still interoperate.
If I'm going to use hg-git, I might as well use git itself. I don't want to use git; I want to use hg.
Bitbucket (a popular mercurial hosting site) has added git support. Has any popular git hosting site added mercurial support? This shows which DVCS is winning.
It's a power grab, and we benefit from it. There is no need for any DVCS to "win". Now you can use whatever you want without restrictions, why force others to use what you use?
Developers are religious. Whether it is vi vs emacs, or IDEA vs Eclipse or Mac vs Linux. In September we had a huge debate internally (hundreds of comments long) on functional vs non-functional programming.
We know that no-one wins in these religious debates.
We've found that developers are equally religious regarding their DVCS. Most frequently it is whatever DVCS you started with is the one that you're passionate about.
We've found that most companies of any size have both Git and Mercurial lurking somewhere in their development ranks. Previously if they wanted to host their code in the cloud (and who wouldn't), they would have had to choose two different hosting providers. As a developer, this was a pain as you never knew where your code was.
Now that Bitbucket supports both, you no longer have to choose. We think this is a huge win! Companies can store all their code in one place. And with the per-user pricing, it is a very fair pricing model (don't have to think about whether a fork is going to cost you or not!).
Free unlimited private repos for up to 5 users; with competition like that maybe we'll see github improve it's pricing.
I doubt it. There is no need for them to, they aren't hurting or struggling. Running businesses with "lets offer more for free" and "ohh crap, they offer more for free, lets lower our price" is a race to the bottom. It is actually moves like these that make me question Bitbucket more. How viable is the service long term? Do I want to trust all my own code to them?