34 votes

Sunsetting Mercurial support in Bitbucket

17 comments

  1. [6]
    Deimos
    (edited )
    Link
    This is really surprising in a few different ways. Bitbucket started with only Mercurial support. I remember that because when I was first starting to use distributed version control, I went with...

    This is really surprising in a few different ways. Bitbucket started with only Mercurial support. I remember that because when I was first starting to use distributed version control, I went with Mercurial. I was using Windows for most of my development at the time, and Mercurial was easier to use through Windows, and also had some neat other features like hg serve to be able to sync my code between my desktop and laptop easily. So I ended up originally having to use Bitbucket for some repos I wanted to host on the internet, since it was the only place with support for it.

    It also seems really unnecessary for them to actually delete the Mercurial repositories as part of this, and I think there's a good chance we'll end up losing some significant historical ones where the owner just isn't paying attention, or even doesn't have access any more.

    I need to log in to see if some of my old repos are still under Mercurial, but it seems like Bitbucket's broken right now (probably because of this).

    11 votes
    1. [3]
      undu
      Link Parent
      It's not easy to see what VCS is a repo stored in unfortunately. There's also no automated way to migrate repositories. Seems like Atlassian has already put mercurial in bug-only maintenance mode...

      It's not easy to see what VCS is a repo stored in unfortunately. There's also no automated way to migrate repositories.

      Seems like Atlassian has already put mercurial in bug-only maintenance mode and is eager to pull the plug off.

      8 votes
      1. bhrgunatha
        Link Parent
        Once you're logged in you can filter your own repos: https://bitbucket.org/dashboard/repositories?scm=hg https://bitbucket.org/dashboard/repositories?scm=git I agree it seems a severe disservice...

        Once you're logged in you can filter your own repos:

        I agree it seems a severe disservice not to provide an automatic way to switch or import into a git clone since they will eventually delete the repos.

        7 votes
      2. ntgg
        Link Parent
        If you are moving to sourcehut, there is a script to migrate repos: https://hg.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/invertbucket. You could probably modify this to work with most other hosts too.

        If you are moving to sourcehut, there is a script to migrate repos: https://hg.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/invertbucket. You could probably modify this to work with most other hosts too.

        6 votes
    2. [2]
      hungariantoast
      Link Parent
      This whole situation seems like what Archive Team exists for. I wonder if they'll get on this? You can download an archive of the Mercurial repositories right off Bitbucket, no need to actually...

      and I think there's a good chance we'll end up losing some significant historical ones where the owner just isn't paying attention, or even doesn't have access any more.

      This whole situation seems like what Archive Team exists for. I wonder if they'll get on this?

      You can download an archive of the Mercurial repositories right off Bitbucket, no need to actually use Mercurial to clone the repositories, so it should be straight forward for a project to get set up, I would think.

      5 votes
  2. [6]
    blueshiftlabs
    Link
    Shame to see this disappear, and an even bigger shame that they're outright deleting Mercurial repositories. In my opinion, Mercurial is Git done right - Git is way too focused, UX-wise, on what...

    Shame to see this disappear, and an even bigger shame that they're outright deleting Mercurial repositories. In my opinion, Mercurial is Git done right - Git is way too focused, UX-wise, on what you're doing to its internal data structures, rather than the task you're actually looking to accomplish. Mercurial also has several nice features that don't have any true Git counterpart - once you've used hg evolve, you'll wonder how you ever worked on chains of commits without it.

    With Bitbucket not supporting Mercurial anymore, are there any hosting providers left that support it?

    9 votes
    1. [4]
      anowlcalledjosh
      Link Parent
      You may be interested to know that, originally, git was not intended to be a version-control system in its own right – the idea was that a user-friendly VCS would be developed on top of git.

      Git is way too focused, UX-wise, on what you're doing to its internal data structures, rather than the task you're actually looking to accomplish.

      You may be interested to know that, originally, git was not intended to be a version-control system in its own right – the idea was that a user-friendly VCS would be developed on top of git.

      10 votes
      1. teaearlgraycold
        Link Parent
        Nothing more permanent than a temporary solution.

        Nothing more permanent than a temporary solution.

        8 votes
      2. [2]
        imperialismus
        Link Parent
        Interesting. Got a source on that? Git was written specifically because the Linux kernel found itself without a VCS Linus was satisfied with, and was pressed into that service almost as soon as it...

        Interesting. Got a source on that? Git was written specifically because the Linux kernel found itself without a VCS Linus was satisfied with, and was pressed into that service almost as soon as it was functional. It wasn't exactly an idle academic project. At what point in this process were there any serious plans to replace working with git directly with a hypothetical system built on top of it?

        7 votes
        1. anowlcalledjosh
          Link Parent
          Wikipedia: citing Linus Torvalds in an email from 2005:

          Wikipedia:

          Git was originally designed as a low-level version-control system engine, on top of which others could write front ends, such as Cogito or StGIT.

          citing Linus Torvalds in an email from 2005:

          Never mind merging. It's not an SCM, it's a distribution and archival
          mechanism. I bet you could make a reasonable SCM on top of it, though.
          Another way of looking at it is to say that it's really a content-
          addressable filesystem, used to track directory trees.

          10 votes
    2. hungariantoast
      Link Parent
      sourcehut.

      With Bitbucket not supporting Mercurial anymore, are there any hosting providers left that support it?

      sourcehut.

      6 votes
  3. aphoenix
    Link
    I'm astonished, well not really. Git has kind of "won"; it's the version control used most, despite the fact that hg actually is better than git in a lot of ways. I think it makes sense for...

    I'm astonished, well not really.

    Git has kind of "won"; it's the version control used most, despite the fact that hg actually is better than git in a lot of ways. I think it makes sense for bitbucket to make a move like this, but it's a bit of a bummer for people who want to host their mercurial stuff on a "tier 1" repository provider.

    8 votes
  4. xster
    Link
    It's also been a few years since I shopped for a hosted provider so when I saw the new, I thought "meh, there'd be others". Surprisingly there isn't really any that's as extensively supported as...

    It's also been a few years since I shopped for a hosted provider so when I saw the new, I thought "meh, there'd be others". Surprisingly there isn't really any that's as extensively supported as BitBucket.

    Sourcehut is paid and has a big "sr.ht is currently in alpha, and the quality of the service may reflect that" banner.

    3 votes
  5. mrbig
    Link
    When my time comes, I don’t wanna die. I wanna “sunset”.

    When my time comes, I don’t wanna die. I wanna “sunset”.

    2 votes