Mercurial popularity is stagnant

[till plewe]

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 12:16 AM, cowwoc <cowwoc at bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
> Till,
>
> There is a price to pay for a stagnant popularity. The specific example I
> brought up is the lack of a good Mercurial repository management platforms
> (self-hosted, cloud-hosted, social networking, etc).

OK. I may seem to be a bit dense, but for me one of the points of DVCS
is that I do not need a "repository management platform".
Cloning/downloading archived versions for using projects and push/pull
permissions for development is all what should be needed. Beyond that
you can (and I believe should) use local tools.

>
> Take a look at http://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/q/3506 versus
> http://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/q/867
>
> The available options for Mercurial are substantially worse than for Git.
> Whether you're an enterprise customer or an OSS developer, the existing
> solutions are quite poor.

Let me try again. What functionality is needed beyond what is provided
by hgweb, or a simple unix account to which the developers have access
via ssh?

- Till

PS. I am not trying to be facetious I simply have never encountered a
situation where using such a platform would be useful or even
advisable.