contribution process

[cowwoc]

Augie,

I brought up this topic because someone brought it up off-list in 
response to my post. I have never attempted to contribute to hg (mostly 
because my lack of Python experience) but I can definitely see how 
(quoting Paul) "emailing patches is a crummy process".

I understand your reluctant to rely on non-OSS services, but I think 
people would benefit greatly from a better-organized, more visual 
contribution process as Github-style pull requests provide. I'm not 
asking you to stop accepting patches through the mailing list, but 
rather suggesting that accepting pull requests off Bitbucket would be a 
major step in the right direction. In any case, this is a 
self-correcting problem. If pull requests become very popular it would 
justify spending some resources investing in a more OSS service. If, on 
the other hand, no one uses it then your risk is low (if the service 
closes tomorrow you risk only the few issues submitted this way).

I think you could pretty easily generate mailing list traffic from pull 
requests, but not the other way around (as you seem to be asking).

Gili

On 02/07/2014 2:10 PM, Paul Nathan wrote:
> Development by emailing patches is a crummy process. That has been remarked upon more than a few times in the mailing list. I won't reiterate reasons previously mentioned. If contributions are down, use bitbucket as the central staging repo and use their pull requests.  There's also a foss clone of bb that I can't recall the name of atm.
>
> I don't see hg as lacking features, personally.  It beats git in nearly every way imo.
>
> ---
> Regards,
> Paul Nathan
>
> On July 2, 2014 10:28:24 AM PDT, Augie Fackler <raf at durin42.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 2, 2014, at 11:34 AM, cowwoc <cowwoc at bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Augie,
>>>
>>> Perhaps it would help if we could streamline the contribution
>> process…?
>>
>> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/ContributingChanges is the current
>> process, for reference. If you've got advice on how we could make that
>> more inviting, let's talk it out?
>>
>>> Right now the main hg repository is http://selenic.com/repo/hg. As
>> far as I can tell, there is no "pull request" process so contributing
>> could certainly be made easier. I don't think this is *the* answer for
>> fixing Mercurial's popularity but faster growth would certainly help us
>> catch up on any missing features (which, in my opinion, is half the
>> problem).
>>
>> I'm not sure how pull requests would help here? It'd add a place I have
>> to check for patches. Also, I'm completely unaware of
>> free-as-in-freedom tools that support pull requests - if you're aware
>> of something, please let me know. I'd at least spend a little while
>> investigating.
>>
>> If someone was interested in writing some sort of web service that
>> could turn our mailing list traffic into a somewhat pull-request-like
>> UI, that'd be something of great interest to me - that'd be the best of
>> both worlds.
>>
>>> Gili
>>>
>>> On 01/07/2014 1:36 PM, Augie Fackler wrote:
>>>> On Jun 30, 2014, at 1:35 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc at bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to bring your attention to:
>>>>>
>> http://www.google.ca/trends/explore?hl=en-US&q=mercurial,+git,+github,+bitbucket&cmpt=q&content=1
>>>>> It seems to me that GitHub is directly responsible for Git's
>> popularity
>>>>> skyrocketing in 2009. By comparison, Mercurial's popularity seems
>> to be
>>>>> stagnant for a while. Bitbucket initially did a decent job, but
>> ever since
>>>>> they got bought out by Atlassian all public announcements emphasize
>> Git
>>>>> support and don't mention Mercurial at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Case in point:
>>>>>
>> http://blog.bitbucket.org/2012/12/10/feature-branches-just-got-better/
>>>>> How do we go about reversing this trend?
>>>> I think one thing that would help would be users blogging more about
>> their workflows and how hg makes them productive. I keep meaning to do
>> this, but I have too many things pulling at my attention to ever manage
>> to get started.
>>>>> Gili
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>> http://mercurial.808500.n3.nabble.com/Mercurial-popularity-is-stagnant-tp4011549.html
>>>>> Sent from the General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mercurial mailing list
>>>>> Mercurial at selenic.com
>>>>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mercurial mailing list
>> Mercurial at selenic.com
>> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial