So I think, we should host the CMS on GitHub.

GitHub is nicer and has far more features. It's also just down right sexy.

Let's for example compare the project overview interface.
https://github.com/LK-/lurklib vs http://hg.cybershade.org/cmsv1/overview

Bitbucket looks kinda clunky imho. GitHub has a nice uncluttered user interface. Notice, also how when clicking on a file. It uses ajax to load the file, which is quite smexy.

Now, down to functionality.

Both Bitbucket and GitHub uses HTTPS. All good there.
Both Bitbucket and GitHub offer wikis. However, GitHub offers the power and functionality of having Git-backed wiki[This point does not apply to the CSCMS though. Given we have our own wiki now]
GitHub uses Git which is > than Mercurial imho.
Both GitHub and Bitbucket offer an issue tracker. GitHub's is sexier though.
https://github.com/LK-/lurklib/issues vs
GitHub of course, offers an API for pretty much everything. So full site integration is easily possible. E.g: Issue tracker API: http://develop.github.com/p/issues.html
GitHub also allows you to edit a file, and commit it over the web interface.

Now to address some of xLink's arguments.
Linky raised the issue, about documentation of GitHub etc.
GitHub has excellent documentation. http://help.github.com/
I'd also be happy to help CSCMS developers with any questions/issues.
Linky also raised the issue regarding the fact, that the project's commit history is in Mercurial. I'm unaware of anything to convert the db to Git. However, I do think using Git/GitHub would be better in the long run.

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=GitHub+vs+Bitbucket
http://www.google.com/trends?q=GitHub%2C+Bitbucket

So what are your thoughts, on switching to GitHub?

I also support this change. Another advantage is Git is more popularly used, and tons of developers use GitHub. This could increase activity to Cybershade.

Also, this looks interesting: http://repo.or.cz/w/hg2git.git
Or this: https://github.com/pdmccormick/hg2git

Right so..

Github is definitely more distinguished than BitBucket is. That's a fact and there's nothing to add to it. Now, that would give the CMS, of course, more users to it. Both xLink and Jesus I believe are unfamiliar with Github itself, like I am. We are all use to Mercurial and BitBucket but I believe it's not THAT much of a difference, honestly. Now, for the transfer, not sure about that either, if it's possible then fuck yes, if not it's a new CMS Core anyways.

I'd switch to it if I could destroy my account over at Bitbucket. And that is possible by clicking here.

Although, in the end, I QFT:

Besides, we'll get LK-, Scub and drsexbot following us which will boost our activity.

Like I've said, I'm happy with what ever decision people make.

I believe that Git has it's pro's such as the advertisement and a lot of people have experience with it within CS.

However, Mercurial seems to be a good bet because it means no migration downtime, no complications etc, but a lot of people know it well now because we've been using it for the last few years.

Familiar with hg, and don't want to learn Git? No problem. http://hg-git.github.com/
Familiar with SVN, and don't want to learn Git? No problem. https://github.com/blog/644-subversion-write-support

Ultimately I'm all for Github, I've used git as a version control client before. I'm familiar with the commands and how it works.

I'm all for

ill close this thread now as we have switched to GitHub ^^