Shipping hg-git by default?

[Sean Farley]

anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com> writes:

> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Augie Fackler <lists at durin42.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 10:28 AM, anatoly techtonik <techtonik at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Looks like https://bitbucket.org/ ditched Mercurial:
>> >
>> >     Bitbucket is the Git solution for professional teams
>> >
>> > So for me personally there is no incentive to use HG
>> > anymore (even though I really miss 'hg inc`), especially
>> > when I setup new virtual machine on Cloud9 or similar
>> > platform to quickly patch and test one of my projects.
>> >
>> > But.. if installation of Mercurial already included hg-git
>> > support, I could still use it to work with GitHub right of
>> > the box without an additional installation hassle, which
>> > is, of course, putting me away from that at the moment.
>> >
>> > What do you say?
>>
>> hg-git needs a ton of work to be viable for inclusion like this. It'd
>> need things like better handling of history rewriting (incl. some
>> modicum of phases support, as well as coping with rewrites on the git
>> side more gracefully), and probably also a fair amount of UI spit and
>> polish.
>>
>
> [ ] better handling of history rewriting
>   [ ] modicum of phases support

I've already done this and am sending out patches to hg-git currently.

>   [ ] coping with rewrites on the git side more gracefully

I think I have a solution for this and will bring it up at the next
sprint.

> [ ] UI split
> [ ] UI polish

There are still some rough edges in my fork but hopefully those will get
smoothed over the next year.