On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 15:10 +0200, Holger Berger wrote:
> Almost no utility software
> supports Mercurial which will not be very attractive to developers.
Hi, Holger -
Of course the third party tools that support Mercurial are not yet as
widespread and diverse as those around Subversion or CVS. Mercurial has
only been in existence for a little over a year, while Subversion got
its start five years ago.
One of the factors that makes it possible to grow the ecosystems around
a tool like this is when projects start using it. Already, we see
plenty of evidence of this, with multiple Integrated Development
Environments (Eric and Pika, for example), supporting Mercurial, and bug
tracking integration through the very popular and well-regarded Trac
project.
However, in another message, you bring up some further points that are
worth a brief mention.
> Hello? I was talking about Mercurial support in other applications
> such as source browsers,
I think that you'll see support for Mercurial in OpenGrok relatively
soon, since Sun presumably needs this functionality.
> search engines,
Built in to the web interface.
> backup tools,
Built in: "hg clone" and "hg pull".
> patch signers,
Mercurial already supports GPG-signed commits.
> bot and daemon support (for
> generating RSS feeds,
RSS feeds are built in. Writing a CIA plugin would take half a day.
> commit emails,
Code already available.
> firewall and proxy support).
Built in.
Since you appear to be very angry, so much so that you seem not to have
researched the points you are making, perhaps you should take a step
back and try to make some statements that stand up to some closer
examination, so that we can all understand what is going on.
I'd be happy to help you to resolve any valid concerns you might have at
that time.
Cheers,
<b
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss@opensolaris.org
