[Ur] New website?

[Istvan Chung]

On 07/28/2015 01:32 PM, Adam Chlipala wrote:
> - Moving to Git & GitHub also seems like a no-brainer.

I'd like to express a somewhat late -1 vote for moving to git.  Git has
a number of technical deficiencies compared to Mercurial.  Firstly, its
command-line syntax is more difficult to use.  More importantly, git has
a poor philosophy regarding history: git history is treated as mutable
(e.g. "git commit --amend" and "git rebase"), changesets can in some
cases end up as "orphaned objects" and be automatically
garbage-collected, and the git history does not keep a record of which
branch a given changeset is on.  Mercurial treats history as immutable
by default, and makes it much more difficult to corrupt it.

All in all, the main reason a project wouldn't want to use Mercurial is
because it has some barrier to entry due to being less well-known than
git.  However, since Ur/Web is already using Mercurial, this isn't much
an issue.  The main advantages associated with GitHub are a nicer web
interface, issue tracking, and pull requests.  However, since the
investments in running Ur/Web's web interface, Mantis issue tracking
system, and mailing list have already been made, this is a relatively
small gain, especially if we would continue to use the mailing list and
Mantis for pull requests and issues anyway.

-- 
Istvan Chung