51–60 of 73 posts
This is great. While I use only travis for build/testing at the moment, I really appreciate a real competition between GH / GL / BB. Users of all the platforms win because of this.
This is pretty much identical to how Gitlab does it. I was hoping they would take it at least one step further not just copy it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question... are you using HG because of history, or do people actively choose HG over Git for new projects still? Have used both, they are so close, seems "odd" to go for the way less popular one, barring you have a really old HG repo and haven't bothered to switch.
I do, assuming its just for me. I still much prefer the hg cli over git. But, I'll grant its not worth fighting over if I am working with collaborators who have a git preference.
http://blog.npmjs.org/post/144855273708/announcing-npm-for-a...
I was really impressed; It's really slick having the source-control/collaboration and CI/CD so tightly integrated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pipelines is free during beta [1]. The post-beta pricing has not been announced. [1] https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/BITBUCKET/Bitbucket...
Hi, I'm one of the Product Manager on Bitbucket Pipelines. The beta is indeed free, with a limitation on the number of minutes per user per month (starting at 300mins/user/month but that may change during the beta). We haven't decided on the post-beta pricing yet. The beta will help us understand better how our customers are using it so that we can price it accordingly. We're leaning towards a model that scales well…
Based on the video, this appears to require Docker [1] I can only with for support of FreeBSD/Jails. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=122&v=p5KgjeZB8W...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question... are you using HG because of history, or do people actively choose HG over Git for new projects still? Have used both, they are so close, seems "odd" to go for the way less popular one, barring you have a really old HG repo and haven't bothered to switch.
I do, assuming its just for me. I still much prefer the hg cli over git. But, I'll grant its not worth fighting over if I am working with collaborators who have a git preference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is pretty much identical to how Gitlab does it. I was hoping they would take it at least one step further not just copy it.
What could have been made better?
Some of the ideas we're working on to improve it further:
- deployment environments (acceptance, pre-prod, prod)
- manually confirming deployments for production
- review apps deployments of feature branches
It's too bad this is git only for now. Is there any plan to add support for mercurial repositories?
Serious question... are you using HG because of history, or do people actively choose HG over Git for new projects still? Have used both, they are so close, seems "odd" to go for the way less popular one, barring you have a really old HG repo and haven't bothered to switch.
Mercurial has a number of features that git never implemented - in particular revsets. I also prefer the hg CLI over the git CLI. Mercurial has sane, concise online help, and a lot of work went into the design of the command-line to be consistent, composable, and made of pieces that do one thing and do it well.
It's too bad this is git only for now. Is there any plan to add support for mercurial repositories?
Serious question... are you using HG because of history, or do people actively choose HG over Git for new projects still? Have used both, they are so close, seems "odd" to go for the way less popular one, barring you have a really old HG repo and haven't bothered to switch.