Dead as in essentially nobody uses it. Apparently it’s used even less than SVN, which sounds kind of crazy. Doesn’t stop them developing it if they want I guess.
Facebook is relevant because they were one of the last major users of Mercurial and were big contributors to it. They’ve moved to their own VCS Sapling now though.
What’s the actual argument here? If Mercurial satisfies/satisfied the development team, then they should use it. I don’t find this crazy. Like others pointed out, it’s not like Mercurial was a dead project without maintenance.
No developer is an island. By using an extremely unpopular VSC they increase the barrier to contribution for all external developers, miss out on support in tools and projects that only support Git, and they don’t get to benefit from the increased development effort that goes into more popular solutions.
It’s sad that an entity the importance and the size of Mozilla chose GitHub over self-hosting. It’s insane they were still using Mercurial in 2025.
They aren’t moving, it’s a code mirror. Everyone seems to be misreporting this. There’s a GitHub action to auto close PRs.
It’s not a mirror. It’s the primary repository. And yes unfortunately they aren’t accepting PRs or using it for issue tracking, but it’s a start.
Oh, well then I stand corrected. It’s a bit confusing ngl
In your defense, Mozilla did have a read-only mirror on GitHub for a while. I assume it’s the same repo, they’ve just repurposed it.
What?
What what? Mercurial is dead. Not even Facebook use it any more.
Dead? They just had a major version update 1 month ago and the last minor release was 1 week ago.
What does Facebook using it have to do with anything?
Dead as in essentially nobody uses it. Apparently it’s used even less than SVN, which sounds kind of crazy. Doesn’t stop them developing it if they want I guess.
Facebook is relevant because they were one of the last major users of Mercurial and were big contributors to it. They’ve moved to their own VCS Sapling now though.
What’s the actual argument here? If Mercurial satisfies/satisfied the development team, then they should use it. I don’t find this crazy. Like others pointed out, it’s not like Mercurial was a dead project without maintenance.
No developer is an island. By using an extremely unpopular VSC they increase the barrier to contribution for all external developers, miss out on support in tools and projects that only support Git, and they don’t get to benefit from the increased development effort that goes into more popular solutions.
Going to need a source for this.
https://stackoverflow.blog/2023/01/09/beyond-git-the-other-version-control-systems-developers-use/
That’s not supporting your point, it’s showing that hg is literally the only other VCS other than git and svn that anyone uses.