Bitbucket ... wtf?



  • So I decided to throw up a public repository on bitbucket using mercurial. Downloaded their sourcetree app, and setup the initial repo, no problem. Create a test file after linked local directory to mercurial and the sourcetree app, and commit it, again no problem. Then I go to push it to my repo on bitbucket ... and everything blows up. It keeps telling me authentication failed. Which is fascinating because I used the same credentials to log into the damn repo in the first place both in sourcetree and on bitbucket.com.

    Ideas? It might be the corporate firewall I suppose, although I don't understand why it would only be nuking the authentication traffic.



  • @Vaire I would STRONGLY recommend using git on bitbucket instead of mercurial.

    But the easiest way to get it working is to create your repository, and create a local folder on your computer that you want to manage the repo out of. Empty this directory if it already has contents (Just cut to a different temp folder) and use the CLONE IN SOURCE TREE option from the bitbucket UI. Copy the files back from your temp folder into the cloned repo folder, and then commit it back to bitbucket for your initial commit.

    After the initial commit source tree/bitbucket updates work exactly as you would expect. The initial commit is usually the uglyness.

    Also, if your account has two factor auth... just remove it and/or use SSH authentication. Source tree + 2fa + bitbucket generally just fails.



  • Y U NO SSH AUTH?

    Edit: Holy fuck look at that, post not invalid



  • @Matches I will give it a try later. Would have responded earlier but the forums were down for me with SSL errors. But I am not using git. Git can die in a fire. =_=


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @Matches said in Bitbucket ... wtf?:

    @Vaire I would STRONGLY recommend using git on bitbucket instead of mercurial.

    Why? I've used hg on bitbucket a bit and haven't had any problems.

    @Matches said in Bitbucket ... wtf?:

    After the initial commit source tree/bitbucket updates work exactly as you would expect. The initial commit is usually the uglyness.

    It's been a while since I started a repo there. I don't recall if I tried to migrate anything or what.



  • @boomzilla It's been years since I used hg with Bitbucket but it worked ok for me as well.

    As for new repo, after you create it on bitbucket, you just add it as a remote to the local repo and push. At least that's how it works for git.



  • @boomzilla Bitbucket (for me, which is the only experience I draw from for bitbucket) has a talent for fucking up merges on mercurial for me. Maybe it's just source tree, maybe it's windows, maybe it's magic.


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @Matches I don't recall having any problems, but then I haven't done that much with stuff on there. And I certainly didn't use sourcetree or Windows.



  • @Vaire I'd be inclined to blame SourceTree, which is a godawful broken mess with a terrible UI.



  • @blakeyrat You ain't kidding. Basic functions that I would expect to "just work" throw up cryptic error messages. Lordy I hate everything to do with git and anything that touches it. It's like a freaking cancer.
    0_1459363868256_ponyDoNotWant.png


  • ♿ (Parody)

    @blakeyrat said in Bitbucket ... wtf?:

    SourceTree, which is a godawful broken mess with a terrible UI.

    Mercurial doesn't seem to have an awful CLI like git (I've used hg, like svn, from the CLI a lot, but git only a tiny amount). But if you're allergic to CLIs, is hgTortoise better than SourceTree?



  • @blakeyrat said in Bitbucket ... wtf?:

    @Vaire I'd be inclined to blame SourceTree, which is a godawful broken mess with a terrible UI.

    I am 80% sure it is just SourceTree. I encountered many bad experience when trying to resolve problems for my coworkers who were intent on using SourceTree not just for Mercurial but Git too... The default installation did not assist in setting up SSH for users. "Installation Wizard" alright :rolleyes:


Log in to reply