It feels to me like github has already won—when looking for code, I’ve begun to just search for site:github.com first, because it’s usually faster. I can practically use github as a social network now. If I have a project I want to open source, I know that the people who follow me on github will see it, and possibly use it. By abandoning it in favor of hosting my own, or switching to bitbucket, it seems to me like I’ll lose that. Incompatibility with the protocol, which is fundamentally just a bunch of scripts that work with git objects, doesn’t seem like a big enough reason for me to change. Github basically just augments that, although, yes, admittedly, it depends upon http endpoint that are not part of the existing git assumptions. See: hub
Github’s recent slowness has really been annoying though, wish that stopped.
Any of you use both git and mercurial? Why would you choose git over hg or vice versa?
I have only toyed around with mercurial, because I like git better.
Basically, the different comes down to one big thing: hg believes that history is sacred, and git doesn’t. Everything else spawns from this. You’ll also hear a “it’s about the branches” meme as well.
Do you think git rebase is a bad idea, or a good one? If you think it’s bad, you’ll choose hg, if you think it’s good, you’ll prefer git.
Thanks for that info. I’ll read up about those two things.
No problem. If you have more specific questions, don’t hesitate to get in touch.
Thanks! I appreciate that!
I use both; it really depends on who I’m working with. For most of my own projects I use git, mostly because it’s faster in my experience.
I do have a zsh script that makes working in both easier; it should run in bash.
I removed https:// from your link and got to your site. It just hung otherwise. Thanks for sharing that.
I didn’t know about these potential issues since I’ve barely used git at all. That was a very interesting and useful article that might keep me from “committing” to GitHub as my VCS platform.
See that’s the exact problem. You just conflated GitHub and git. :( git is a VCS. GitHub is a startup.
Please, use git. It’s an amazing VCS.
I’m not “conflating” GitHub and git but I understand how it sounds that way. I understand that git is totally separate and I will be using it along with Xcode and possibly for my OpenBSD work as well (hg is in the running too). The article just gives me some pause as to how committed I want to be to the GitHub universe. BitBucket looks like a very interesting alternative to me.
In my situation, I will almost certainly end up running all my own infrastructure. I essentially do already for everything else and there isn’t much reason to change that.
Roger. I can see how we both got that from the sentence, my apologies.
No problem. Thanks.
As an alternative to github, you might check out bitbucket. It supports both mercurial and git, offers unlimited private repositories, and I find it to be equivalent to Github sans the types of features mentioned in the article. For what it’s worth, I use both services heavily; bitbucket seems to have similar performance to the self-hosted repositories I’ve used in the past.
An alternative to the alternative is gitorious.
Don’t forget http://gitlabhq.com/ as well.
Hadn’t heard of them, actually.
Very interesting. I like what I’m seeing so far. Thanks!
[Comment removed by author]
Since I’m just now getting into development, how often does the typical developer run into this pull request vs. send-email difference?
Whenever the developer doesn’t have write-access to the remote repository and wants to contribute a patch. So – depends on the project ;)
Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.