My workaround to the large files problem was to accept the fact that I will lose the revision history on those files. But I don't see features that compare to what Atlassian offers. Now that Microsoft owns them, perhaps they don't have to worry about generating revenue (don't know if it's good or bad). Github seems to be the popular choice for open-source, since that's how it got started. I also like companies that continuously improve and invest in their products, among other things. The tools from Github are a bit weak for my business. The reason I picked Bitbucket was because I liked and used all the other products that Atlassian provides, JIRA, Confluence etc. The service provider you choose should give you the tools you need to do your job. I made the jump over a year ago and haven't looked back. But it might be an issue if you are using an extension that only one service provider supports. So let's say you found a way to import your repo to GitHub, you can easily turn-around and move it to GitLab, bitbucket or whatever. So after the migration I did a diff on the project folder, identified the large files, which were missing from the new Git project and just copied them over and pushed them up to the Git repo. Don't forget that the core GIT functionality is the same regardless of service provider. Not a huge deal, since most large files I had were installers and binaries that didn't have revisions per say.
Otherwise you can use the web migration tool provided by GitHub. The automatic import tools provided by GitHub and others don't like that extension and barf.
The main problem I encountered was using the "large files" Mercurial extension. I did the migration using the HG-GIT extension: I had to migrate many projects from Mercurial to Git. I was using Kiln to host my code, which used Mercurial.
#Change letters size in hg mercurial windows code
I've started migrating the open source code I still have on bitbucket (Mercurial-based repos) to Github.
0 kommentar(er)
