EOL of (usable) git, switch to Mercurial?

[rsbecker@nexbridge.com]

On September 10, 2025 6:30 PM, Brian Inglis wrote:
>On 2025-09-09 10:29, ASSI via Cygwin wrote:
>> Andrew Schulman via Cygwin writes:
>>> On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 10:23:13 +0200, Mark Liam Brown via Cygwin wrote:
>>>> Since git has decided to EOL itself by a switch to RUST (which poses
>>>> a chicken and egg problem for bootstrapping, among other technical,
>>>> political and licensing issues),
>
>What appear to be the remaining licensing and political issues?
>
>>> For those of us who aren't in the know, could you please provide some
>>> links to git's plans and what the issues are? A search on "git rust"
>>> turns up a lot of stuff but it's hard to know what's relevant.
>
>> TL;DR: This did not happen (not yet anyway) and it won't happen in the
>> near future either.
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250904-b4-pks-rust-breaking-change-v1-0-
>> 3af1d25e0be9@pks.im/
>I consider 2026H2 - a year - pretty near, with possibly another year and a half of
>security patches, giving us 1-2.5 years, realistically 1.5 years to decide whether we
>could get rust working, or should migrate to a git successor.

Unfortunately for the rest of us non-Rust people, successors appear to be written
In Rust also. This does not make me feel good about the future of DVCS systems.

-Randall