On Monday 13 November 2006 22:23, David Woodhouse wrote: > So... if we discount the religious issue of the language it's written > in, why _would_ we consider using Hg instead of git? > > I'd be much happier with git. The recent proliferation of version > control systems isn't a good thing -- I strongly believe that in general > we should stick with CVS where it's good (or entrenched) enough, and use > git for for the rest. The reasons I have thus far are (in no particular order) A) even smaller server footprint than git B) a user experience that isn't a complete disaster, leading to multiple rewritten front ends that confuse the issue even further C) an upstream that is actually willing to listen to our problems and fix them or help us to fix them These are why I feel hg would be a better choice than git, from my experiences and talking with other Fedora contributors. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpsaOXCbvb5n.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
-- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
