The CATASTROPHE, bitbucket drops mercurial support

[Uwe Brauer]

>>> "MF" == Michael Forbes <michael.forbes at gmail.com> writes:

   > 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)

It seems that sourcehut will not stay free (of pay)

   > * 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.

Ah well one severe problem is to find a hosting service which would
provide the necessary facilities (enough storage space etc)

I will play around with sourcehut for the next days. Right now I don't
know who to answer an elementary question:

How can I share just one  private repository with somebody who has a
sourcehut account.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5025 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.mercurial-scm.org/pipermail/mercurial/attachments/20190821/a2f9f8a7/attachment.p7s>