Mozilla Firefox Development Finally Moving Entirely To Git

[vextium]

Should of moved to jj smh (sarcasm obviously) but it is an interesting project! https://github.com/martinvonz/jj

[archibald]

You mean to tell me MICROSOFT WINDOWS ADOPTED GIT BEFORE FIREFOX

That's true, but it's worth noting that this is Firefox specifically. Within Mozilla, git is already used by far more projects (https://fosstodon.org/@gabrielesvelt...63022543261332).

[vextium]

You mean to tell me MICROSOFT WINDOWS ADOPTED GIT BEFORE FIREFOX

I mean with that logic you could say the same with Arch, Arch just migrated to Git, this isn't really a productive reply because it requires significant effort to do VCS migrations right.

[Berniyh]

It's far easier. git is (probably, i hope for them) good for kernel development and Linus way of handling things. But for the rest of us, mercurial is a lot easier. They indeed arrived around the same time, for the same reason (Linus ditching bitkeeper).

I actually disagree. I think it might be true for somebody who worked with cvs and svn before. (And maybe some other tools)

Personally, I only really started with git, when it came up, around 2008 and I never had big issues with its usability. On the other hand, I found svn to be very complicated and also had my usability issues with hg, although I have to say that the latter I haven't used to such an extend that I would be certain on the judgement.
So it could also depend on where you start at. Are you used to svn-like semantics and concepts? Maybe then hg seems easier and simpler to you than git?
Have you started with git directly, then your experience might differ.

[pgeorgi]

You mean to tell me MICROSOFT WINDOWS ADOPTED GIT BEFORE FIREFOX

They migrated from TFS. With a quality of life improvement like that, it makes sense for Microsoft to move to git earlier.
The hg->git transition doesn't provide significant improvements to developer workflow, it just standardizes on the "winning" system while reducing the load on admins.

I suppose Mozilians who prefer mercurial can still use https://wiki.mercurial-scm.org/HgGit

[ssokolow]

So it could also depend on where you start at. Are you used to svn-like semantics and concepts? Maybe then hg seems easier and simpler to you than git?
Have you started with git directly, then your experience might differ.

I'd say it's more complex than that. I bounced off CVS, then went Subversion → Bazaar → Git and didn't find it particularly difficult to use the parts of git equivalent to what I was doing with Subversion and Bazaar.

Does git have a lot of UX warts? Hell yeah... but I found Mercurial to be just as imposing with the added problem of needing to understand enough of its workings to set up the workflow git gave me by default.

Just because I jumped cold-turkey from daily-driving Windows as an experienced power-user to daily-driving Mandrakelinux 10.0 in the early 2000s and spent a month feeling like a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs until I grew confident that my dual-booting time had trained me to fix any problems that arose doesn't mean I wanted that experience with a customized VCS workflow.

[jindam]

probably offtopic_

* why using google mailing list?
* why using github instead of gitlab
or anyother?

* obviously no walk the talk
and ironic also

[elbar]

Breaking News: Launchpad Bazaar is looking for Admin

[Berniyh]

I'd say it's more complex than that. I bounced off CVS, then went Subversion → Bazaar → Git and didn't find it particularly difficult to use the parts of git equivalent to what I was doing with Subversion and Bazaar.

Does git have a lot of UX warts? Hell yeah... but I found Mercurial to be just as imposing with the added problem of needing to understand enough of its workings to set up the workflow git gave me by default.

Sure, quite possible.

Basically I just wanted to point out that e.g. svn might not be that easy to use either, if you're used to something else. In the past, I often tried to use it and do certain things and quickly decided to give up and just import the damn thing with git-svn.
Which actually isn't always a nice thing to do, since it creates quite some load on the svn server, but in a way that's also their fault for not using a proper scm.

Thankfully, these days almost everything is git anyways or in many cases you can find good and verified git mirrors on github.

[orzel]

So it could also depend on where you start at. Are you used to svn-like semantics and concepts? Maybe then hg seems easier and simpler to you than git?
Have you started with git directly, then your experience might differ.

I don't think so. The big 'step' was to go from a fully centralized to p2p-like management. Both hg/git are similar in this regard, as were all 'new' systems at that time (and that's a very huge improvement wrt before !).

I really think git is complicated/cumbersome. Even after all those years, my help file for git is extremely long, and i keep on referring to it. My mercurial file is small, and i never open it. All of this while (alas!) using git a lot more than mercurial.

There are lot of rants on the net about git being complicated. It's been 18(?) years and new releases keep on mentionning "simplifiying", which kinda show that this is a recognized fact, more or less agreed even by the developers.