One thing that seems surprisingly unclear in the docs is the remote support story.
From an open source user's perspective, this looks like it should be documented very explicitly, ideally in one small table near the introduction or clone docs.
Something like:
- Git remotes: supported
- GitHub: supported, with a better integrated workflow for pull requests and stacked changes
- Mercurial remotes: not supported / not a primary workflow
- Sapling-native remotes: supported in principle, but what is the open source server story?
- Mononoke: experimental / unsupported for public OSS users?
Right now, the practical impression is that Sapling is mainly a better client for Git repositories, but that is not stated as clearly as it probably should be.
I think having a simple "Which remotes are supported?" section would remove a lot of confusion for potential adopters.
One thing that seems surprisingly unclear in the docs is the remote support story.
From an open source user's perspective, this looks like it should be documented very explicitly, ideally in one small table near the introduction or clone docs.
Something like:
Right now, the practical impression is that Sapling is mainly a better client for Git repositories, but that is not stated as clearly as it probably should be.
I think having a simple "Which remotes are supported?" section would remove a lot of confusion for potential adopters.