Shipping hg-git by default?

[Augie Fackler]

(+sid0, whom I sort of threw under the hg-git bus a few months ago)

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:06:03PM +0200, Erik Huelsmann wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Augie Fackler <lists at durin42.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:28 AM, anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
[snip]

> Even then, I'm not sure it makes complete sense, but it's pretty
> > academic unless someone wants to invest that kind of time into hg-git
> > (I don't personally have the time or motivation.)
> >
>
> From the reactions on this thread, it looks like it makes complete sense to
> a number of people :-)
>
> What does the above remark about time and motivation mean in the longer
> term though? I mean, do you still have time to update your repository if
> you should get pull requests that are up to your standards?

Siddarth from Facebook has been doing most reviews of late, but I'm
still happy to review patchbombs to the hg-git google group when he's
overloaded.

> If not, would there be ways to organize future development
> nonetheless? You seem to imply that one person should be picking up
> the development, however, if there are small enough actionable
> items, maybe many people can make a difference together?

Honestly, I think if some folks showed up and demonstrated that they'd
be good stewards of the package, Siddarth and I would be happy to pass
along maintainership. As it is, I feel like I should keep at least one
eye on things for the forseeable future, as historically people stay
motivated for about six months and then don't do even basic things
like keeping up with Mercurial API breakage.

>
> Thanks for your work on the module so far!
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Bye,
>
> Erik.
>
> http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.
> Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.