On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Denis Shelomovskij
<verylonglogin.reg@gmail.com> wrote:
05.08.2011 9:38, Jacob Carlborg пишет:
On 2011-08-04 16:16, Jesse Phillips wrote:
On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 08:27:26 +0200, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I'm so sorry. I haven't prioritized DWT and I've forgotten pull requests
and patches in tickets. I will look into this. Maybe I can move the
repository to bitbucket or github, this will make it easier creating and
merging pull requests.
I'm bias toward Git, I'm really liking submodules.
I like both git and github more than mercurial and bitbucket. Many seem
to switch to github for their D development; DMD, Phobos Druntime; all
of them are now on github. But on the other hand the DWT repository is
already a mercurial repository and there are several forks on bitbucket.
Why? IMHO hg is better than git (newer program that fixed issues of older git and svn). Maybe github is convenient but it isn't because of git. It's a big shortcoming of github not to support hg.
Actually, that is completely false. Git and HG were released within a month of eachother, have very similar feature sets, and didn't really influence eachother during development. Github is exclusively for Git, and Bitbucket is exclusively for Mercurial because you can't really mix them at all.
It's a matter of taste, not a matter of "fixed issues." They're different programs built at the same time to accomplish the same goals.