News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by hyperbling on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:02AM (#7247771)
emacs is moving off of bzr.
[deleted]
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by Walkman on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:20AM (#7247826)
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by leobelle on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:53AM (#7247959)
Yeah I was wrong. Thanks!
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by reaperhulk on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:21AM (#7247832)
Git is (mostly) GPLv2. The other licenses, at least according to git's docs, are GPLv2 compatible.
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by philipn on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:23AM (#7247842)
git is licensed under the GPL (== v2), just not GPL (>= v2).
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by rainmaking on Sunday February 16, 2014 @06:01PM (#7249741)
<smartass>logically impossible, you mean (== v2), just not GPL (> v2)</smartass>
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by nsmartt on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:20AM (#7247827)
> Git is an Open Source project covered by the GNU General Public License version 2 (some parts of it are under different licenses, compatible with the GPLv2).

https://github.com/git/git

Re:Prefer mercurial to git by cheradenine01 on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:21AM (#7247834)
Huh?

Git is GPLv2.

Re:Prefer mercurial to git by gcv on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:26AM (#7247850)
No, the project's leads have already approved the move to Git, and ESR is spearheading the (massive) effort involved.
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by Luyt on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:52AM (#7247952)
Indeed, ESR wrote this about it: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=5211

"This is a brief heads-up that the reason I’ve been blog silent lately is that I’m concentrating hard on a sprint with what I consider a large payoff: getting the Emacs project fully converted to git. In retrospect, choosing Bazaar as DVCS was a mistake that has presented unnecessary friction costs to a lot of contributors. RMS gets this and we’re moving.

I’m also talking with RMS about the possibility that it’s time to shoot Texinfo through the head and go with a more modern, Web-friendly master format. Oh, and time to abolish info entirely in favor of HTML. He’s not entirely convinced yet of this, but he’s listening."

He's also involved in freeing code-repositories from their prisons, and porting them to other versioning systems, with the Reposurgeon. See https://gitorious.org/reposurgeon/

"reposurgeon enables risky operations that version-control systems don’t want to let you do, such as (1) editing past comments and metadata, (2) excising commits, (3) coalescing commits, and (4) removing files and subtrees from repo history. The original motivation for reposurgeon was to clean up artifacts created by repository conversions. It also functions as a repository conversion tool. Supported VCSes include git, hg, bzr, and Subversion."

Re:Prefer mercurial to git by geocar on Sunday February 16, 2014 @10:24AM (#7247845)
git is GPLv2 not GPLv2-or-any-later-version.
Re:Prefer mercurial to git by judk on Sunday February 16, 2014 @11:43AM (#7248158)
GPLv2-or-layer is effectively GPLv2 plus recipient-friendly features. It is NOT suitable for the intended purpose of GPLv3, which adds restrictions on the recipient (for the benefit of 2nd-order recipients of derivatives).