Migration to Git/Github

I mean, maybe technically bookmarks do it; but they're not well supported
(e.g. can you even push them to bitbucket?) and there's basically no
documentation for their workflow AFAIK; compare to git where the *built in*
feature actually works.

On Sat Nov 29 2014 at 2:42:46 PM Donald Stufft <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

> In git-and-github.rst:
>
> > +when you run into problems the liklihood that someone else had that problem
> > +and posted a question and recieved an answer is also far likelier.
> > +
> > +Thirdly by using a more popular tool you also increase your options for tooling
> > +*around* the DVCS itself. Looking at the various options for hosting
> > +repositories it's extremely rare to find a hosting solution (whether OSS or
> > +commerical) that supports Mercurial but does not support Git, on the flip side
> > +there are a number of tools which support Git but do not support Mercurial.
> > +Therefore the popularity of git increases the flexibility of our options going
> > +into the future for what toolchain these projects use.
> > +
> > +Finally by moving to the more popular DVCS we increase the likelhood that the
> > +knowledge that the person has learned in contributing to these support
> > +repositories will transfer to projects outside of the immediate CPython project
> > +such as to the larger Python community which is primarily using Git hosted on
> > +Github.
>
> Re: Branching, I'm not sure. I certainly agree with you on that front
> though Mercurials "bookmarks" seem to be something similar to git style
> branches. Although there is only one namespace for bookmarks so if I have a
> local bookmark named X and the server has a bookmarked named X which is for
> something different Mercurial will get confused.
>
> Re: Windows support, that's a good point and I'll call that out explicitly.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
> <https://github.com/dstufft/peps/pull/2/files#r21056047>.
>