Moving to ... Github vs Bitbucket

[Łukasz Rekucki]

On 16 February 2012 16:02, Stan <stanisla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Feb 9, 1:49 pm, zalew <zal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > We're going
>> > to solve that with our move to Git/GitHub, which will make it much
>> > easier for people to fork and much easier for core developers to
>> > integrate contributions.
>>
>> a bit offtopic: why nothttp://bitbucket.org?similar features, it's on
>> python/django and already popular in django community.

1) I can't argue about popularity, because I have no data, but most
Django applications I use come from github, so it's also quite
popular.

2) I don't think Django should care if the collaboration tool runs
python/django or java/grails as long as it's useful for developers.
Anything beyond that is politics and that's what DSF might care about
(I don't).

3) As for similar features... sometimes "similar" is not enough. I'm
not a regular Bitbucket user, so I maybe just didn't discover that,
but how can you add per line comments in patches on Bitbucket ?
Without that, code reviews for non-trivial patches is a real PITA.

--
Łukasz Rekucki

[Andrew Ingram]

On 16 February 2012 15:42, Łukasz Rekucki <lrek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1) I can't argue about popularity, because I have no data, but most
> Django applications I use come from github, so it's also quite
> popular.
>
> 2) I don't think Django should care if the collaboration tool runs
> python/django or java/grails as long as it's useful for developers.
> Anything beyond that is politics and that's what DSF might care about
> (I don't).
>
> 3) As for similar features... sometimes "similar" is not enough. I'm
> not a regular Bitbucket user, so I maybe just didn't discover that,
> but how can you add per line comments in patches on Bitbucket ?
> Without that, code reviews for non-trivial patches is a real PITA.

Speaking from my own subjective tastes, I much prefer the experience
of using Github over Bitbucket. Simple things like showing the source
tree on a project's homepage make far more sense to me than showing
the latest commit messages. If I'm looking for how something works in
Django, the first thing I do is go to the github repo and browse the
source code.

Additionally, almost every library I use as a dependency can be found
on Github, and familiarity is a very useful tool. South is the only
significant exception to this.

Regards,
Andy

[Adam "Cezar" Jenkins]

Github is just lightyears ahead of Bitbucket in design and usability. Beats it on features and community too. They only time I consider Bitbucket is only the circumstance that I need free private repos. That situation hasn't come up yet.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-d...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.

[Henrique Bastos]

Here are my 2 cents.

IMHO, any developer that is currently contributing with Django can easily work with both Bitbucket or Github.

AFAIK, the purpose o this big change is to enable more people to contribute lowering the contribution barrier. With that in mind, I don't think the decision should simply rely on a "feature comparison matrix" between the options.

The point is to enable people to communicate more effectively towards the code, and on that matter, I don't really see a competitor for Github.

All the best,

--

Henrique Bastos

Twitter: @henriquebastos
Skype: henriquebastos.net

+55 21 9618-6180

[Mikhail Korobov]

A heavy bitbucket user here.

I personally prefer hg to git and bitbucket to github but I think github + git would be better for django because of much larger community.

Guys, but please stop bashing bitbucket. Bitbucket supports both hg and git (github don't), has nice bugtracker; bitbucket has hundreds of django packages on it (please don't call them unsignificant); it is in active development since Atlassian came, etc. Default repository landing page can be easily set to source browser in repository options. Hope this discussion won't become "github vs bitbucket" or "hg vs git" holywar.

[Jacob Kaplan-Moss]

Hi folks --

Please can we not have this argument? This is one of those holy wars
that can get really, really ugly and I'd like to nip it in the bud.

There's no way we'll come to consensus here any more than we'd be able
to come to consensus on a choice of text editor, operating system, or
favorite color.

So it's BDFL territory. Adrian and I agree on GitHub, so if and when we
move, that's where it's going to be.

If you really feel so strongly about this decision that you need to
weigh in, please email us privately.

Thanks.

Jacob

[Łukasz Rekucki]

On 16 February 2012 18:27, Jacob Kaplan-Moss <ja...@jacobian.org> wrote:
> Hi folks --
>
> Please can we not have this argument? This is one of those holy wars
> that can get really, really ugly and I'd like to nip it in the bud.
>

Sorry for fueling this up. Should have think a few times more before
sending that. Also, it wasn't my intention to "bash bitbucket" or
anything like that so sorry for that too.

I'll just shut up now and let the silence hide this thread.

--
Łukasz Rekucki

[Reinout van Rees]

On 16-02-12 16:42, Łukasz Rekucki wrote:
> 1) I can't argue about popularity, because I have no data, but most
> Django applications I use come from github, so it's also quite
> popular.

Last year's djangocon.eu was instructive for me. We were debating
github/bitbucket at the office at the time.

But when every single source code link in a presentation (except for the
talk by bitbucket itself) points at github, it is very difficult to
argue for anything else than github. (So I stopped arguing for bitbucket
at the office and we're using github now).

Reinout

--
Reinout van Rees http://reinout.vanrees.org/
rei...@vanrees.org http://www.nelen-schuurmans.nl/
"If you're not sure what to do, make something. -- Paul Graham"

[Markus Gattol]

I am not a Django contributor, just a user. Whether it's github or bitbucket or something else, the more important question is stick with the current system and workflow as well as policies or move the code and then of course also have a somewhat different workflow when you start using githubs/bitbuckets/etc ticket system.

Obviously the plan is to move the code to github but continue to use trac for issues. It's to time consuming and complicated (look at the current discussion among core devs on django-dev about how to better document policies for contributing because it's to confusing) already so this certainly would make it even worse.

Maybe it's a naive view of things but in the end Django is a Python lib, there are many such on github/bitbucket using the well integrated features of the platform so folks can actually spend their time developing the software itself rather than spending time on figuring out policies and maintaining infrastructure which gets so time consuming that the number of people who actually do stuff is quite small in the end.

I am not criticizing, it's just something that's a bit odd, I mean, what's so special about Django that it couldn't go with githubs/bitbuckets tickets as well? Current trac could be made read-only and tickets continued on gh/bb and simply link into trac for some time until all older tickets are resolved and trac can be shut down entirely.

But then again, I am no core dev, not even a contributor, just a user. Maybe all the bureaucracy and policies around contributing is needed in case of Django. If so then sorry for the noise :)

[zalew]

Just wanted to ask from curiosity if it were other factors besides broad popularity, as BB is a great alternative. Most dev probably use both services, at least passively, as lots of good code is here and there, and I'm not against GH in any way. Per-line comments are actually a very good point, I hope BB will implement it.

I'm a user, not a dev, so I'll take what you give (as most of us), and contribute where it is hosted, be it GH or BB. Cheerz, keep up the good work.