Mercurial "server"

Question

I've been using Mercurial for a little while, but mainly for my own use. Now though, I have a project I'm working on where two of us are building the same project, and we will probably be modifiying each other's files.

I would like to setup a Mercurial repository on a server, make that repository the "server", so my changes and the other editor's changes both push to that server (so basically the Subversion / CVS model); I like Mercurial though and don't want to switch to something like Subversion.

Here in my own network, everything is done on Linux, and my "server" has OpenSSH installed. So pushing my changes (I work on multiple computers) from one computer to the server is just a matter of "hg push"; the protocol used is SSH for transfering the changes.

The problem is that I use Linux, the server will be Windows (so no OpenSSH, right?) and the other editor will be using Windows too. As far as I know, the best way of working in Mercurial in these types of setups is for the repository to pull changes from the source, rather then the source pushing to the "server". I'm behind several firewall's (not entirely my network) and my computer won't be visible from the server, and I'm assuming the other editor will be behind a firewall too (so we can't just start up the local Mercurial HTTP server and get the "server" computer to pull from that).

What's the best way for both editors to get our changes to the server repository? (I should add that the server is a server on the Internet, so it is just as visible as something like google.com. It's a hosted Windows server, but I would probably have permission to install software if needed for this.)

Solution 1

I suggest Kiln from www.fogbugz.com. It's a commercial source control solution, basically a Windows wrapper with Mercurial under the hood.

Update 2020-10-24

11 years ago, Mercurial might have been a viable solution, but not any more: Git just works.

Solution 2

I believe reading the project's documentation is a nice start: https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/PublishingRepositories.

Solution 3

It might also simplify the administration to outsource it -- if you only have one repository and a couple of guys pushing/pulling it, you could do a lot worse than just hosting it somewhere like Bitbucket. (And for a one-repository solution it's actually free.)

Update: It is 2020 now and Bitbucket no longer supports mercurial, see: https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

For a list of hosted or self hosted free or paid solutions see https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/MercurialHosting

Solution 4

Take a look at rhodecode it's a open source Mercurial server with many of the features that Kiln offers, including code search. It even integrates nicely with LDAP so you can authenticate HG users with your Windows domain.

Solution 5

Update: It is 2020 now and Bitbucket no longer supports mercurial, see: https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

For a list of hosted or self hosted free or paid solutions see https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/MercurialHosting

I recommend putting your project on http://bitbucket.org/, a Mercurial repository hosting site.

If you don't want the source to be seen by others they have settings to create private repositories. I think you're allowed one private repository before they start charging you for it.

Edit: Bitbucket now provides unlimited private/hidden repositories.

View more solutions

Comments

[Alistair Bell]

Sure it would. BitBucket has the concept of private repos, which the rest of the world can't see (they can't even see that it's there). If you're sufficiently paranoid that putting your code on a machine somebody else owns is a problem, fair enough; but for everyone else, it's quite doable.

[user85116]

I don't think you understand commercial development practices; there is no way that raw source code from this company is going to be hosted on somebody else's server, regardless of whatever "private" repositories exist. It's just not an option.

[user85116]

Please see my comments to mizipzor and Alistair Bell.

[Mizipzor]

Thats the same solution we use in my team.

[Roland Tepp]

I am afraid that you don't understand what Kiln offering by Fogcreek entails. Kiln is not a hosted service - to be fair, you can use FogCreek provided hosted service if you like, but Kiln is an autonomously installable server software. (All the gritty details of pricing are discussed on this page -- fogcreek.com/Kiln/Details.html#forYourServer )

[Contango]

I'd suggest you don't understand what the Kiln offering by Fogcreek entails. I purchased and installed Kiln on our Amazon EC2 server, and its running nicely right now. Its just a very nice wrapper around Mercurial.

[xsx]

@TJ, not if you explain how much of their time you'll spend figuring out how to manage your own central repo.

[xsx]

Commercial doesn't imply ignorance.

[Alistair Bell]

@Chris: different companies have different paranoia levels, and that's fine. If 85116 can't persuade his company to outsource this stuff to BitBucket or Fog Creek (some will, some won't) his best option will probably be to buy a copy of Kiln that he can run locally. Personally I'd outsource, but in many companies that goes in the 'too hard politically' bucket.

[user85116]

Wow, talking about ignorance... some of you just don't get it. Please read Alistair's comment above again, and again, and ...

[user85116]

You're right, didn't realize kiln could be installed on my own server. Thanks for the tip.

[Valentin V]

Why not ditch sharing at all? It's useless in the end.

[Brandon Montgomery]

How long until Kiln has a free version, like VisualSVN?

[o0'.]

-1 only because it's a duplicate answer stackoverflow.com/questions/740075/mercurial-server/…

[Lars Tackmann]

Check rhodecode.org its a open source mercurial server with many of the features kiln has (although not all).

[Peter Groves]

I had a look at this. It's a nice system. You need to get your head around running a python app, but it wasn't to hard. I couldnt fugure out howto run it as a Windows Service though

[Warren P]

If only RhodeCode could be easily installed on a Windows box.

[justengel]

There is an open source version of Rhodecode. It is now called Kallithea. pythonhosted.org/Kallithea

[marcinkuzminski]

RhodeCode (and other company projects) are open-source actually. Please check code.rhodecode.com for a full list. There a lot of added functionality in 4.X series of RhodeCode that are not in Kallithea too, like diff syntax highliting, pull-request merges, smart code reviews etc...

[The incredible Jan]

I would never outsource closed source code. I cannot see why security should be the same as paranoia.