On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:08:09AM -0700, Manuel Ortega wrote:
> There are a lot of people saying "Github is better than Bitbucket for reasons
> XYZ, therefore we should move to Github".
>
> The problem is that moving to Github means Bram and the rest of us have to
> switch to git. The problem
On 3/14/2015 5:21 AM, Nikolay Pavlov wrote:
... BTW, it appears that I either mistaken what mq was intended for or
they no longer consider changeset evolution *just* as mq replacement:
new documentation talks about what I thought changeset evolution
should be used for.
And mq is never going
>
> > Bruno Sutic wrote:
> >
> > It's possible to use a local Mercurial repository with Github, right?
> > So the instructions on how to get Vim would only need to change the URL.
>
> Github unfortunately does not have support for Mercurial repos.
> However, it is possible to use Mercurial locally
2015-03-14 6:57 GMT+03:00 lilydjwg :
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 07:43:57AM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> Yes, that's mostly what I was referring to. While long-time git users may
>> find it obvious that push --force is a stupid thing to do, new git users
>> may not realize that. I sure woul
2015-03-14 3:32 GMT+03:00 MURAOKA Taro :
> I think it is problem that the name of "vim" is taken by someone
> already on github.
> https://github.com/vim
>
> Could we request to concede that "vim" name
> if we deside to move to github?
Github has a thing called “name squatting policy”
(https://hel
Saying that mercurial belongs to the past and is an older generation tool
than git is rather ridiculous. Git is used more widely than mercurial,
mainly due to Linux kernel and github. But from a technical perspective,
mercurial is designed far more elegantly and much easier to use than git,
without
On 3/13/2015 8:57 PM, lilydjwg wrote:
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 07:43:57AM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
[...]
Yes, that's mostly what I was referring to. While long-time git users may
find it obvious that push --force is a stupid thing to do, new git users
may not realize that. I sure would not have t
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 07:43:57AM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
> [...]
>
> Yes, that's mostly what I was referring to. While long-time git users may
> find it obvious that push --force is a stupid thing to do, new git users
> may not realize that. I sure would not have thought of that; I certainly
> w
I think it is problem that the name of "vim" is taken by someone
already on github.
https://github.com/vim
Could we request to concede that "vim" name
if we deside to move to github?
And we should ask bitbucket same thing.
https://bitbucket.org/vim
2015-03-14 8:38 GMT+09:00 Mislav Marohnić :
> H
Hi, GitHub employee here. I'm not here to talk anyone into using git over
anything else, but to provide a bit of perspective as both long-time open
source maintainer[1] and huge Vim fan[2].
On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 4:54:03 AM UTC-7, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>
> Despite all the popularity of gi
Honestly I don't see anyone successfully arguing that git or mercurial is
better or worse, they are both great and you can do good and bad things in both
of them. Discussing it much further will probably not be very effective.
Google themself write "To meet developers where they are, we ourselve
There are a lot of people saying "Github is better than Bitbucket for reasons
XYZ, therefore we should move to Github".
The problem is that moving to Github means Bram and the rest of us have to
switch to git. The problem here is not git itself, but the switching. The
path of minimum modifica
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 06:30:12PM +0300, Павлов Николай Александрович wrote:
> Here is the story:
Unfortunately that's a possible story. There's many things wrong with
it. But yeah, it's a usecase that certainly can happen to a user not
familiar with git.
You can also argue that this is a featur
I read somewhat recently about Kiln, which gives one front-end that lets you
use *either* Hg or git with:
http://blog.fogcreek.com/announcing-kiln-harmony-the-future-of-dvcs/
They seem to imply they may be flexible on the number of users for open-source
projects
(http://blog.fogcreek.com/share
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On March 13, 2015 10:56:56 AM EAT, Fredrik Gustafsson wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:38:23PM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
>> And, Mercurial is a tool that makes it very hard to shoot yourself in
>> the foot. Git makes it very easy to lose data perman
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 07:43:57AM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
> As for the server disallowing it, consider when you are pushing to
> something that might not even BE a server; perhaps it is a backup
> repository, or some intermediate repository, or a repository you set up to
> share your work with oth
On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 2:57:04 AM UTC-5, Fredrik Gustafsson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:38:23PM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
> > And, Mercurial is a tool that makes it very hard to shoot yourself in
> > the foot. Git makes it very easy to lose data permanently, even when
> > you're doing s
Hi Bram and List,
Any good :-)
Bram Please decide.
I continue to write a patch of Vim. Yeah!
Best regards,
Hirohito Higashi (a.k.a. h_east)
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, vi
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:18:36PM +0100, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> On Fr, 13 Mär 2015, guyzmo wrote:
>
> > another feature that makes working with pull requests less painful, it's
> > that now you can get them from their own feature branche, by adding the
> > following to the github remote:
> >
Hi guyzmo!
On Fr, 13 Mär 2015, guyzmo wrote:
> another feature that makes working with pull requests less painful, it's
> that now you can get them from their own feature branche, by adding the
> following to the github remote:
>
> fetch = +refs/pull/*/head:refs/remotes/origin/pr/*
>
> then
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 02:36:30PM +0200, LCD 47 wrote:
> On 13 March 2015, guyzmo wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 08:09:24AM -0400, Peter Aronoff wrote:
> > > On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 12:53PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> > > > Despite all the popularity of github, it doesn't seem to be able
>
Bram Moolenaar :
> Despite all the popularity of github, it doesn't seem to be able to do
> something as simple as sending a user a message. Do I need to fork a
> repostitory and send a pull request just to get someone's attention?
GitHub removed the messaging functionality a few years ago as the
On 13 March 2015, guyzmo wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 08:09:24AM -0400, Peter Aronoff wrote:
> > On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 12:53PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> > > Despite all the popularity of github, it doesn't seem to be able
> > > to do something as simple as sending a user a message. Do I
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 08:09:24AM -0400, Peter Aronoff wrote:
> On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 12:53PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> > Despite all the popularity of github, it doesn't seem to be able to do
> > something as simple as sending a user a message. Do I need to fork
> > a repostitory and send
On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 12:53PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Despite all the popularity of github, it doesn't seem to be able to do
> something as simple as sending a user a message. Do I need to fork
> a repostitory and send a pull request just to get someone's attention?
You can get users' att
Taro Muraoka wrote:
> I have a suggestion.
>
> We should create/obtain an organization which have good simple name
> like "vim" on bitbucket/github, for accesibility and convenience of
> end-users.
Despite all the popularity of github, it doesn't seem to be able to do
something as simple as sen
On 13/03/15 18:11, Xavier de Gaye wrote:
The Python developers have also discussed recently about moving to GitHub
versus BitBucket. See this thread:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.devel/150459/focus=150639
In one of the 100 mails of this thread, one of the core developers
raised the
On 03/12/2015 08:28 PM, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>
> Bruno Sutic wrote:
>
>> It appears google code is shutting down:
>> http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
>>
>> Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
>> I know I'd be more than delighted if i
I also believe GitHub is the correct decision since it's pretty much standard
and is so because people love it. If the two alternatives are GitHub and
BitBucket I see GitHub as an improvement and BitBucket as a continuation of
what we have to today.
I've used a lot of plug-ins over the years an
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:38:23PM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
> And, Mercurial is a tool that makes it very hard to shoot yourself in
> the foot. Git makes it very easy to lose data permanently, even when
> you're doing something like a *push* which should *never* lose data in
> my opinion. Mercurial
On 13 March 2015, Andre Sihera wrote:
> On 13/03/15 11:36, Charles wrote:
> >>>Please, don't start this again. Search the archives for the
> > > >previous Git vs. Mercurial pissing contests, and for why
> > > >neither actually matters.:)
> > Seriously, is using that kind of fli
I have a suggestion.
We should create/obtain an organization which have good simple name like "vim"
on bitbucket/github, for accesibility and convenience of end-users.
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying
On 13 March 2015, Andre Sihera wrote:
> On 13/03/15 03:41, LCD 47 wrote:
> >On 12 March 2015, Taro MURAOKA wrote:
> >> It is not difficult to migrate/sync the repository from mercurial
> >> to git.
> >>
> >> We (vim-jp) have been maintaining a mirror on github already.
> >>
> >> https://github.com
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 01:31:19PM +0900, Andre Sihera wrote:
> A lot of people have expressed simply technical reasons for choosing a
> successor to Google code. However, more than the technical reasons, the
> financial stability and political strategy of the company must not be
> forgotten.
I ag
Bram Moolenaar於 2015年3月13日星期五 UTC+8上午3時28分45秒寫道：
> Bruno Sutic wrote:
>
> > It appears google code is shutting down:
> > http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
> >
> > Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > I know I'd be more than delight
On 13/03/15 05:24, Christian Brabandt wrote:
On Do, 12 Mär 2015, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Gary Johnson wrote:
> > On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> > > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > > >I know I'd be more th
2015-03-13 11:00 GMT+08:00 Navdeep Parhar :
> The "source of truth" vim repository is in mercurial right now and
> everyone here has already figured out how to use their favorite VCS with
> it. So a move to bitbucket won't disrupt anyone's workflow too much.
> But a move to git *will* affect thos
On 13/03/15 11:36, Charles wrote:
Please, don't start this again. Search the archives for the
>> > >previous Git vs. Mercurial pissing contests, and for why neither
>> > >actually matters.:)
>> > Seriously, is using that kind of flippant and arrogant remark the best
>> > argument you ca
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 08:39:08PM -0600, Christian J. Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2015, Charles wrote:
>
> >I think both mercurial/git and github/bitbucket are both great options so
> >the problem is less technical and more preference. I suggest to put an
> >online vote and see which option
On Fri, 13 Mar 2015, Charles wrote:
I think both mercurial/git and github/bitbucket are both great
options so the problem is less technical and more preference. I
suggest to put an online vote and see which option the majority of
vim community prefer.
I agree with this. My preference would
I think both mercurial/git and github/bitbucket are both great options
so the problem is less technical and more preference.
I suggest to put an online vote and see which option the majority of
vim community prefer.
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:13 AM, 陈世用 wrote:
> It's time to move forward. Github p
It's time to move forward. Github please!
2015-03-13 9:50 GMT+08:00 Guyzmo :
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:53:58AM +0900, Andre Sihera wrote:
> > On 13/03/15 03:41, LCD 47 wrote:
> > >On 12 March 2015, Taro MURAOKA wrote:
> > >>> It is not difficult to migrate/sync the repository from mercurial
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:53:58AM +0900, Andre Sihera wrote:
> On 13/03/15 03:41, LCD 47 wrote:
> >On 12 March 2015, Taro MURAOKA wrote:
> >>> It is not difficult to migrate/sync the repository from mercurial to git.
> >>> > We (vim-jp) have been maintaining a mirror on github already.
> >>>
On 13/03/15 04:58, Bruno Sutic wrote:
But yes, I think a move to Github would mean more than just changing the URL in
the instructions.
If it's any worth, I'd gladly volunteer and invest time to help with this.
That's an excellent start. You may well be taken up or your offer!
Please continue
On 13/03/15 03:41, LCD 47 wrote:
On 12 March 2015, Taro MURAOKA wrote:
> It is not difficult to migrate/sync the repository from mercurial to git.
>
> We (vim-jp) have been maintaining a mirror on github already.
>
> https://github.com/vim-jp/vim
Please, don't start this again. Se
On 3/12/2015 4:17 PM, Erik Falor wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:38:23PM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
Mercurial also is a lot easier to pick up with fewer
concepts that need understanding. So I think people who occasionally
need to dabble in Mercurial are probably better off than people who
occasi
[Whoops, meant to reply to the list, too. Sorry for the spam, Ben]
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:38:23PM -0700, Ben Fritz wrote:
> I think it's just that
> more people these days use git,
This is my point, no more, no less. I don't think that Mercurial is
technically inferior to git. It is simply le
On 3/12/2015 12:58 PM, Bruno Sutic wrote:
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 8:28:45 PM UTC+1, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
Suggestions are welcome.
It's possible to use a local Mercurial repository with Github, right?
So the instructions on how to get Vim would only need to change the URL.
Github unfort
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 10:27:14 AM UTC-7, Bruno Sutic wrote:
> It appears google code is shutting down:
> http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
>
> Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> I know I'd be more than delighted if it was h
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 3:27:43 PM UTC-5, ewfalor wrote:
>
> I just signed up for a Bitbucket account, and all of the new-user
> tutorials I'm presented with encourage me to start a git repo. In
> fact, I've only seen Mercurial mentioned once so far. Is Bitbucket
> leaning towards git now,
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 02:01:30PM -0400, Manuel Ortega wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Gary Johnson wrote:
>
> > On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> > >
> > > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > > >I know I'd be more t
Hi Bram!
On Do, 12 Mär 2015, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Gary Johnson wrote:
>
> > On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> > >
> > > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
>
On 2015-03-12, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Gary Johnson wrote:
>
> > On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> > >
> > > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> > >
> > > Bitb
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 8:28:45 PM UTC+1, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Bruno Sutic wrote:
>
> > It appears google code is shutting down:
> > http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
> >
> > Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > I know I'
Hey all, I'm a developer (and Vim addict) for Bitbucket over at Atlassian. Let
me know if you need anything should you decide Bitbucket be the next home for
Vim. We'd love to have you!
Will
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 12:28:45 PM UTC-7, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Bruno Sutic wrote:
>
> > It ap
Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> >
> > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> >
> > Bitbucket please. They have Mercurial.
> >
> > Git sucks.
Bruno Sutic wrote:
> It appears google code is shutting down:
> http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
>
> Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
Suggestions are welcome.
It's
On 12 March 2015, Taro MURAOKA wrote:
> It is not difficult to migrate/sync the repository from mercurial to git.
>
> We (vim-jp) have been maintaining a mirror on github already.
>
> https://github.com/vim-jp/vim
Please, don't start this again. Search the archives for the
previous Git vs.
It is not difficult to migrate/sync the repository from mercurial to git.
We (vim-jp) have been maintaining a mirror on github already.
https://github.com/vim-jp/vim
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to
On 12 March 2015, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> >
> > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved? I know
> > >I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> >
> > Bitbucket please. They have Mercurial.
> >
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 12:46:32 PM UTC-5, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> >
> > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> >
> > Bitbucket
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:46:03AM -0700, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> >
> > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> > Bitbucket please. They
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Gary Johnson wrote:
> On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> >
> > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> >
> > Bitbucket please. They have
On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
>
> >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
>
> Bitbucket please. They have Mercurial.
>
> Git sucks.
SourceForge has Mercurial, too, and im
Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
Bitbucket please. They have Mercurial.
Git sucks.
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Ty
It appears google code is shutting down:
http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2015/03/farewell-to-google-code.html
Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist
66 matches
Mail list logo
