Another problem that I have with homebrew is the refusal of the organization to run package included tests. I’ve had to remove running make test from PRs multiple times
I really think that if a system is maintaining its own binary cache, it really should be running at least some tests to make sure that the functionality is there. The homebrew package tests assure that the package is installed correctly, not library or application functionality
I know that Github was mentioned, but what about the ecosystem support of other extensions?
I think that’s a major factor holding people to Git/Github.
It’s an interesting idea that an easier to use VCS might also encourage more project involvement.
You can have a local Hg repo and push/pull to GitHub no problem.
Could you go into a bit of detail on the best practice/most solid way to use Hg locally with a Github repo?
I’ve been using hg-git with great success. I haven’t used it for much other than making branches (hg bookmarks in this case) and pushing them and merging them, but I’ve been really surprised how well things work. One reason I like it is because some operations in git that I felt were a bit ad-hoc, like squashing commits via an interactive rebase, are a simpler and safer experience in hg with the evolve plugin. Just hg fold --from .... I haven’t tried making tags or signing commits, but for what I’m doing this simpler workflow seems to work fine.
hg fold --from ...