You fags will argue about anything

i don't know about bitbucket but gitlab has been awesome. It's a little more difficult to find stuff, but it's a lot more feature-packed than github and a lot of those features (e.g. pages hosting) are a lot more streamlined.

Sure. Or Gitlab. Or even GitBucket or Gogs or plain Git [over SSH or whatever] on your own machines / rented VPS.

GNU+Linux doesn't sound that stupid now, no?

It causes some troubles, yes.
- Hello, we need you to open some outgoing ports except 80 and 443, and that would be
- What do you need that for?
- Git, out programmers would like to use it
- Sir, we are a govenment facility with strict security protocols, why do you host our code on Github?
- No, it's git, it's out repo, we need that SSH port opened.
- That's what I said. Don't tell me what to do.

Eh, their admin was an idiot, no doubt about that.

Maybe you should talk to people with decent computers skills once in a while, then.

Everyone who isn't a retard has seen git-scm.com before. Maybe not every last person remembers that Torvalds was involved at some point, but sure as fuck they know it's not a github-owned software.

git > mercurial > literally everything even CVS or plain old tarballs > svn

Fossil > Subversion > Mercurial > CVS > tarballing and sending it by mail > Git

Samefag.

nope, just copypaster the row from cat-v harmful software table

>plain Git [over SSH or whatever] on your own machines / rented VPS.

This is what I do.

Why doesn't everybody who doesn't care about sharing their work for free do the same?

>xir doesn't use fossil

what does mercurial do exactly that makes it better? I hear a lot of hot shit people claiming as such, but I literally no no one really using it.

Mozilla uses it :^)

>subversion
>good
>centralized
>master-master replication is locking activity
>no "branches" only branch paths
>half assed features like change lists
>random conflicts that need manual intervention after moving or removing shit.
>svn database schema is too old/new for this version

who in the fuck thinks svn is even remotely good?
literally the worst hot garbage i had the displeasure of using. fuck anyone who fucking uses this horseshit and touts it as even remotely better than git.

ok... and? what makes it better than git other than some vague sense of smugness I seem to get from hg users.

>centralized
>>random conflicts that need manual intervention after moving or removing shit
nothing bad about that, high collaboration model doesn't fit way too many goals

also implying I meant it's good, everything that's not fossil is trash

Richard?

everything bad about it. to have reliable, multi-regional svn masters requires painfully slow and shitty replications that literally lock the fucking repos.

any version control software that isn't self standing in 2018 is pure hot garbage. centralization can be easily achieved through an optional master like gitlab, et al.

and there is everything wrong about manual intervention when dealing with a CI system. sometimes shitty behavior like that breaks builds and requires a full clean checkout and wasted fucking time.

Being centralized makes it harder to work remotely/on the move.

I might not always have a good internet connection on the road, but I always have the full repo on my laptop.

jokes aside, do you really use any type of source control software for personal use or are you just parroting words from blogs?

I like it because it was easier to learn than git. Also it was the first one I learned and I am lazy, that's all.

I see. but does easy also mean you've locked yourself out of the more advanced things git can do?

>not self hosting github enterprise

github is still a great product

>not just using gitlab enterprise at this point
kek

it works ok for personal projects.

>>Everyone who isn't a retard

found the problem.....
I freelance in a lot of different firms. About 70% of git users have no idea what they are doing.

Git and Mercurial originated from the same thoughts and are extremely similar.
Main difference ist, that mercurial can deal with commits that are not on a branch...

The real core difference was, that Git came from the Linux kernel guys and was written in C and could always deal with large codebases, while Mercurial was written in python.
Mercurial is basically dead IMHO. Does nothing that seriously would encourage it's use against the way more common git.

this desu

thanks. so it's just a meme in 2018

That solution doesn't scale

My blog uses source control

Yes it does, that's the whole beauty of git.

after reading atlassian.com/blog/git/git-vs-mercurial-why-git

i'm thoroughly convinced mercurial is actually garbage,
good to know that I can call "senior" devs out for saying retarded shit like "git is dumb" now. figured I'd share for everyone else as well.

>Mercurial would (and still does) recommend that you clone a repository for each branch.
Absolute kek. Anyone who thinks Mercurial is better than Git has to be retarded.

welp, looks like Facebook and Google are retarded then. Good to know basement dwellers from Jow Forums changed my ways of source control ;^)

this.

also rebase is the most powerful shit ever.
It literally turns a bunch of.
"I did x"
"I did y"
"I did z"
commits into one meaningful changeset. hell I usually don't take pr's that haven't been rebased to one commit.

probably. git can do a lot of useful shit for those who aren't pleb. months ago, I had to use git bisect to find out why nouveau was broke in linux 4.13.x.

Google keeps all of their C++ code in one massive repo. So they are clearly pretty retarded

pretty sure they even made some python piece of shit tool to make "git"ing such fuckign retarded monorepo setups sane as well.

40-year-old boomers are the worst
>Git sucks so much, we use Perforce at work, it's SO much better.

>we use Perforce at work
I'm sorry. I'm so fucking sorry. and that's coming from someone who's forced to use boomer tier subversion bullshit.

fucking this, holy shit. I'm friends with professional programmers who always call github "git". It's so embarrassing

Even worse: he's a Python fanatic
>"oh C how awful"
>runs OOP'd to hell and back Python code on an ESP8266 module
>"Yeah it tends to run out of RAM, I've never had to work with such pathetic little processors"

Attached: 11221941_1039064306145061_4943413411379024375_n.jpg (497x732, 52K)

lol'd. I bet the python implementation for that computer probably require you to manually call gc or avoid cyclical references. lol

but ya, rip. that's what "senior" devs are though. just old people who haven't had to find a job elsewhere.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
fuckin' kill yourself

All of Google's open source stuff is Git. Internal stuff is in one giant custom repository, so it's not really comparable to any available VCS software unless you also host source code for millions of developers for a megacorp.

People like GUIs I guess. You also get a lot of other features like merge requests and pretty graphs. Most of the time when I am browsing projects I would rather go through the gitlab/github website than cloning the repo.

>> welp, looks like Facebook and Google are retarded then.

nope... they decided to use Mercurial years ago when both where viable options.

Git just overtook Mercurial in the meantime and now they are going on inertia.

As i said, the actual differences are minimal.