Mercurial popularity is stagnant

[cowwoc]

It's not clear project whether this project is anything more than 
vaporware. As someone mentioned on Stackoverflow, it looks like a 
reskined version of Rhodecode without an installer... so how are users 
really better off?

I hope this picks up one day but if I may nitpick I wasn't a fan of how 
Rhodecode worked to begin with. It had terrible Windows integration (it 
assumed the existence of cron for updating repository indexes, and the 
author refused to fill this gap under Windows). Frankly, I'd be happier 
if the thing was written in Java to gain some better cross-platform 
consistency.

Gili

On 19/08/2014 1:42 PM, Matthew Turk wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:40 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc at bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>> This is a real and legitimate need. Without a web interface, we lose all
>> visual context to our discussions.
>>
>> I can't imagine not being able to annotate bug reports, automated build
>> systems, code reviews to a code repository, branch or a specific section of
>> code. I can't imagine not being able to annotate these links with
>> discussions. Having these conversations by emails, with text diffs is a huge
>> step backward, so much so that I consider having such discussions are
>> impossible.
>>
>> I'll say it again: this isn't a nice to have. It's a very strong *need*.
> I agree.  Kallithea is poised to be an amazing, feature-complete web
> interface for hg:
>
> kallithea-scm.org
>
> -Matt
>
>> Gili
>>
>>
>> On 19/08/2014 1:05 PM, Paul Nathan-2 [via Mercurial] wrote:
>>
>> The Windows personality as personified by devs demands polished gui tools
>> and clickies on webpage forms. :/
>>
>> Believe me, as a a Unix personality supporting SCM, I have years of
>> experience with this.
>>
>> Hgweb is adequate for me...
>> ---
>> Regards,
>> Paul Nathan
>>
>> On August 19, 2014 9:38:26 AM PDT, till plewe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>>>> 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?
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> I'm the main mercurial advocate where I work, and we've been using it
>>>> happily for a couple of years now, using a home-grown server
>>>> application for repository management, code reviews and so on. But
>>>> unfortunately we're now switching to git mostly because of Atlassian
>>>> Stash - the code review tools and integration with bug tracking
>>> (Jira)
>>>> are simply better than the other options we looked at. If Stash
>>>> supported mercurial I don't think we'd be switching.
>>> Is it a decision made by developers or managers? As far as I can tell
>>> there is nothing there which would tempt me to switch but it may look
>>> different on the managerial level. Are there any killer features which
>>> appeal to developers?
>>>
>>> - Till
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mercurial mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mercurial mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
>> below:
>> http://mercurial.808500.n3.nabble.com/Mercurial-popularity-is-stagnant-tp4011549p4012664.html
>> To unsubscribe from Mercurial popularity is stagnant, click here.
>> NAML
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> View this message in context: Re: Mercurial popularity is stagnant
>> Sent from the General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mercurial mailing list
>> Mercurial at selenic.com
>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>>