The CATASTROPHE, bitbucket drops mercurial support

[Michael Forbes]

If the Mercurial community could get behind one or a few alternative hosting options and develop a procedure for transferring information from BitBucket (ideally, including PR info, issue info, etc.) and actively promote this, it might help promote the view of an active, responsive community.

Is it feasible to provide a simple migration plan including some subset of metadata from BB to something like sourcehut?

*edit: some of this was just addressed in a subthread along with a response from Drew of sourcehut*

A few comments/questions related to sourcehut (which I am very interested in exploring, but have not yet had a chance):

* It would really be nice if there was a clear decision path for hg users to choose a hosting option which will likely be different for different users.  The current MurcurialHosting page is quite agnostic, but also not very helpful in this regard (I never looked at sourcehut because it looks like it does not provide online hosting.  It should at least appear in the other categories too.)  Is there an opinion about keeping this page agnostic or could it be restructure to provide a clearer decision path for users.
* What is Drew's commitment to mercurial?  The open-source nature of sourcehut might make this a mute point, but it would be good to know.  (From the subthread and quick response, it seems like he has a strong commitment)
* I really appreciate the rational behind the minimalist design of sourcehut, but suspect that in it's current form, it would be quite off-putting for some people.  (When I heard mumblings about mercurial possibly being dead, the fact that the homepage https://www.mercurial-scm.org/ looks professional and up-to-date went a long way to convince me that this was not the case before finding confirmation on the mailing list.

While BitBucket's decision is sad, this is a great opportunity to get behind an alternative and show that Mercurial is really a viable and competitive DVCS with practical hosting options.

> On Aug 21, 2019, at 8:18 AM, Uwe Brauer <oub at mat.ucm.es> wrote:
> 
>>>> "MM" == Malcolm Matalka <mmatalka at gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> And, at least in my opinion, I don't think this is much of a
>> catastrophe.  BitBucket's mercurial support has been so poor to the
>> point of unusable for years.  They put the nail in the coffin but they
>> weren't giving users much of a reason to use their service anyways.
> 
> 
> Ok I just run a simple test, it supports private repositories, very
> good. Access seems only to be possible via ssh, not https or am I
> mistaken? 
> 
> BTW  sourcehat is  listed in 
> 
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/MercurialHosting
> 
> 
> But not under free services, why?
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial mailing list
> Mercurial at mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial