Talk:Mercurial

Footnotes

Aren't footnotes broken? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blazar (talk • contribs).

Depends on what you mean "broken". The article currently mixes footnotes and enumerated external links, so that could've confused you (external links have the square and arrow image whereas footnotes do not).

Or maybe it was just that the article used an old footnote syntax that is not favored any more. (I converted to the newer <ref></ref> syntax now) -- intgr 18:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

User list

I think the list of users is getting out of hand; the article probably doesn't need to mention more than five major users. The rest could either be moved to a stand-alone list, or deleted.

At first estimation, i think the projects that would be useful to mention in the article are Java, Mozilla, OpenSolaris, and Xen. Comments? --Piet Delport 22:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Keep the five aforementioned and throw away the rest, it's of little use to Wikipedia. -- intgr ^#%@! 23:12, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, done. I've backed each of them with citations to the relevant announcements/evaluations. --Piet Delport 02:51, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe Pidgin is using Mercurial - current development uses Monotone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.137.4.209 (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Absurdity

"It has been ported to Windows, Mac OS X, and most Unix-like systems." No it hasn't - it was written first on one of these systems, then ported to the others. The sentence should read something like "It was written on Linux, then ported to Windows, Mac OS X, and other Unix-like systems". AMackenzie (talk) 22:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

So fix it; Wikipedia is a wiki. -- intgr [talk] 23:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough! Was Mercurial, in fact, first written on Linux? AMackenzie (talk) 13:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Matt Mackall is a Linux kernel hacker; Mercurial was supposed to be one of the contestants to git's current place. -- intgr [talk] 16:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Fixed! AMackenzie (talk) 17:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

citation? - SridharRatnakumar (talk) 18:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

lol xD 213.48.14.66 (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Kernel.org Offers Both Git And Mercurial

While Git is the primary DRCS for the Linux Kernel, Mercurial repositories are also kept in sync. See this repository , or btrfs development. It might be worth mentioning in this article. Tinkertim (talk) 15:54, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes however all the actual development occurs using git, I haven't heard of Linus merging any mercurial branches into his tree, with this kind of logic you may as well say that tarballs and patches are kept in sync with the primary git tree for every snapshot and release candidate. Tuxcantfly (talk) 20:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

"History" section would be more appropriately called "git success story" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Janislaw (talk • contribs) 09:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrary cutoff between "Major projects" and "Others" in "Projects Using Mercurial"?

The distinction between major projects and others seems rather arbitrary and a rather unnecessary potential source of conflict - ie the perceived notability of Netbeans ("others") or Xen ("major") depends on whether you're asking a Java developer or virtualization expert. Wouldn't it be more logical to simply have a straight list going in order of a more objective metric of "notability", ie lines of code, numbers of users, number of active contributers, number of commits, years of active development, or something like that? Tuxcantfly (talk)

Additional external link

Thoughts on adding Joel Spolsky's tutorial? Emurphy42 (talk) 12:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. -- intgr [talk] 17:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Syntax Similarities to Git

It seems like the mercurial command syntax is much like that of git (albeit simpler). Should that be in the article? Mr. Man (talk) 02:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

They both resemble Monotone's interface. Why Git should be mentioned? 91.185.59.181 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC).

Influences

It says it was written after the free version of Bitkeeper was withdrawn, but it doesn't say if it was modeled on or inspired by Bitkeeper. The article should say more about the prior systems that influenced this system. (The Git article has a good section on this.) I would write it myself, but I don't know enough. (I've never used either BitKeeper, Git, or Mercurial.) —MiguelMunoz (talk) 20:39, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Mercurial project down?

http://mercurial.selenic.com/ is timing out, and this post from Dec 11 by Eric S. Raymond intimates something's happened to the Mercurial project. Any information? - David Gerard (talk) 12:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, websites go down sometimes and it's back up now. I think you're reading too much into it.

ESR's comment is a response on the groff list [1] to people who prefer Mercurial or Bazaar admit defeat and now advocate for git due to its popularity. Regardless, I'm sure Mercurial will stick around for a long time still. -- intgr [talk] 22:02, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it was back up. Never mind me :-) - David Gerard (talk) 08:37, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mercurial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/Interviews/gosling_os1_qa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:53, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mercurial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20120709203437/http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0504.3/1404.html to http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0504.3/1404.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110102020012/http://www.ogre3d.org/developers/mercurial to http://www.ogre3d.org/developers/mercurial

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)