But Mercurial itself wasn't (although it was written mostly in Python). I think this is a good example of taking the pragmatic choice (GitHub) over the ideological choice (Bitbucket).

> Why Git/GitHub, as opposed to Mercurial/Bitbucket or some other system? Because it's very well-made, and it's where the people are.

Where the people are would imply because of the social aspects.

Both offer similar feature sets. If I want to keep my fork on Bitbucket, it's easy.

the other point of view is that there are servers that the admin has had a reasonable expectation of being able to set up and let run itself, but those servers shouldn't be pulling from anyone's svn repo anyway.

    pip install -e svn+http://code.djangoproject.com/svn/django/trunk#egg=django

I hope the Django team can fully utilize the benefits of using github, and further decrease the resistance to contributing (through pull requests).

With this change bugs like #17144 wouldn't haunt me for months on end, because I'd just fix it.

A postmortem is what you do when you try to understand the cause of death: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmortem

</nitpick>

It's really a fantastic idea and something I fully intend to use in every capacity that makes sense going forward. It doesn't make much sense as part of the software design flow, but it absolutely could (and probably should) be a tool in any deployment protocol.

My AARs usually read pretty much like this blog post, more or less to the T, although we emphasized what we would do differently in the future more.

The way I work them into the software design flow is just to do them regularly, with varying granularity. We do one every Friday afternoon with beers for the last 30-60 minutes of the day.

Normally we discuss whatever interests us most about the week past. But a couple of weeks ago one of the engineers suggested we do one covering the whole year, and it was great. Lots of interesting observations.

"Post-mortem (disambiguation)" => "Postmortem documentation, a technical analysis of a finished project."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmortem_documentation

However, I never did professional copy editing, and indeed it's a nitpick compared to the occasion. Great news and hopefully this will help Django development.

It's a well known, and extensively used manner of speaking.

There is no controversy --nor should we aspire to avoid "all controversy" by going into laughable measures like censoring stock standard phrases.

By controversy I mean the matter of Django transition to GitHub that IIRC was a subject for discussions for a long time.

A, no problem. I'm a non-native English speaker myself. It's so known a use that it's even in the dictionary:

Post Mortem: 2. Informal An analysis or review of a finished event.

Funny aside: in my language we have a similar half-joking phrase.

When someone asks "How did it go?" after you've done anything that you're uncertain about it's outcome (a job interview, exams, your book getting published, etc), a common answer is "The autopsy will show us".

However, I still generally avoid using that joke with sensitive/more formal matter, preferring to err on the safe side. (Here, as well, misunderstanding might've occurred because the context was a bit less formal than I expected.)

I didn't pay much attention to dictionary references in this thread because I don't trust dictionary much when specific word's usage is in question, more relying on personal experience. Although maybe I should simply get a more extensive dictionary than what ships with OS X—the big problem with the above approach, of course, is that if I never saw a phrase used in some way, it may only mean I never had a chance to.

Judging from your profile info, we do not share a language, but we share a religion (our countries do, that is).