New VCS Choice; SCM SIG

[Rahul Sundaram]

Kristian Høgsberg wrote:

> However, I don't know of any consensus towards hg.  I know that Jesse 
> wasn't impressed when he did the dist-git prototype, but I think he 
> judged it too quickly.  As I see it, git has a lot more buy-in from the 
> upstream open source projects that we package and ship in fedora, and a 
> lot of packagers are also upstream developers and know git already.  
> Name *any* open source project that we ship that is developed in hg?  
> One of the big arguments against distributed version control systems is 
> that "there are so many, clearly it must still be an academic 
> experiment".  Now that git is finally gaining momentum, do we really 
> want to diffuse that by picking hg for such a high profile conversion? 
> And with the 1.5.0 release coming out any day now, a lot of the user 
> interface warts have been fixed.

We dont be diffusing things really. There is one single strong player in 
the distributed SCM field. Xen, RPM, Pungi, OLPC and many others are 
already using Mercurial. Also see 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/VersionControl

Rahul