On 25 Nov 2014 02:28, "Brett Cannon" <br...@python.org> wrote: > > > > On Mon Nov 24 2014 at 2:25:30 AM Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 24 November 2014 at 02:55, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >> > On Sun Nov 23 2014 at 6:18:46 AM Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Those features are readily accessible without changing the underlying >> >> version control system (whether self-hosted through Kallithea or externally >> >> hosted through BitBucket or RhodeCode). Thus the folks that want to change >> >> the version control system need to make the case that doing so will provide >> >> additional benefits that *can't* be obtained in a less disruptive way. >> > >> > I guess my question is who and what is going to be disrupted if we go with >> > Guido's suggestion of switching to GitHub for code hosting? Contributors >> > won't be disrupted at all since most people are more familiar with GitHub >> > vs. Bitbucket (how many times have we all heard the fact someone has even >> > learned Mercurial just to contribute to Python?). Core developers might be >> > based on some learned workflow, but I'm willing to bet we all know git at >> > this point (and for those of us who still don't like it, myself included, >> > there are GUI apps to paper over it or hg-git for those that prefer a CLI). >> > Our infrastructure will need to be updated, but how much of it is that >> > hg-specific short of the command to checkout out the repo? Obviously >> > Bitbucket is much more minor by simply updating just a URL, but changing `hg >> > clone` to `git clone` isn't crazy either. Georg, Antoine, or Benjamin can >> > point out if I'm wrong on this, maybe Donald or someone in the >> > infrastructure committee. >> >> Are you volunteering to write a competing PEP for a migration to git and GitHub? > > > Been there, done that, got the PEP number. I'm just trying to speak from the perspective of the person who drove us off of svn and on to hg (as well as drove us off of SourceForge to our own workflow stack). I personally just want a better workflow. As I said at the beginning, I read your PEPs and talked to you about them at PyCon and I want something like that to happen; push button patch acceptance along with CI of patches would go a long way to making accepting patches easier. But as others have pointed out, we just don't have the volunteer time to make them happen ATM, so I'm willing to entertain moving to GitHub or Bitbucket or whatever to improve our situation.
It may not have been Guido's intention, but his proposal to undercut the entire Python based version control tooling ecosystem by deeming it entirely unfit for our purposes has caused me to dramatically re-evaluate my own priorities. I consider the status quo to be only mildly annoying, which is why I'd been willing to defer proposing improvements. If folks are seriously contemplating proposing a move to GitHub instead, then that changes the equation significantly. Regards, Nick.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
