[sword-devel] DVCS (was Re: Project "Free Scriptures" started)
Peter von Kaehne
refdoc at gmx.net
Wed Feb 26 08:43:25 MST 2014
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:24 AM, Troy A. Griffitts
> <scribe at crosswire.org> wrote:
> Quickly, regarding DVCS, the argument to keeping SVN over a
> DVCS isn't that a DVCS isn't 'better' in some ways or as Peter
> has suggested, wouldn't let us maintain tight review of our
> code or that we simply don't ever want to change anything. We
> eventually switched from CVS to SVN :) The reason the core
> engine uses SVN is because it was the best and most popular
> choice 12 years ago or so when we chose to use it, and
> basically I don't like git (yet).
FWIW I use git a lot module making and for maintaining utilities/scripts
during module making. I do most of my module making etc when I am off,
and a lot of times where I have little access to the net.
I use it as if I had several version control servers in series. I have
two computers, one luggable, one small and truly portable. And a central
I want to work on both laptops in a seamless fashion. So I have a
central Git server to where I push whenever I can and where I pull from
whenever i can.
I have on each laptop all relevant projects under git.
So, as a result I can version and branch around on both laptops, knowing
I can always go back to where I started and can whenever i have a chance
bring both laptops into sync, including all trial branches etc.
Is it easy to use? If you use nothing but add, commit, push and pull,
you have in essence a svn like makup with little or no difference apart
from the benefit of local version control. But from there you can expand
with essentially no limit. SVN is a straightjacket in comparison.
Could a noob learn it? I did. I find it hugely helpful. There are
concepts I have not understood, but I did not need them so far either.
The book I found most helpful is Git Magic. It is simple and
straightforward. Your non-programmer friends could learn it, not that
they would need to. If their projects are not sword, what stops them
from continuing on svn.
> It is not keeping contributors from contributing.
And I think this is simply not true. You got Nic stating that he holds
things back, you got Greg stating that he has stuff not committed, you
have Jaak who clearly has grander plans. We have Kostya who has quietly
worked away on mapping until he got nearly blasted by Chris (though that
seems to be now ironed out). And my own stuff on the filters is still
not in either. And none of us are really able to collaborate in a
sensible fashion other than by exchanging patches or throwing up
alternative locations. Which causes difficulties in its own right.
So things _are_ held back. Maybe not by SVN per se but by the inability
to commit to a central location where others can comment and approve and
share and improve - without impacting on the central branch which needs
full approval. And while Git vs SVN would not be the thing which makes
you approve things faster, Git would allow all of us others to
collaborate speedily towards new releases instead of waiting that every
single small bit gets approved.
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 08:43 -0600, Greg Hellings wrote:
> I've been successfully using git-svn for a while now on my work with
And I looked at it and despaired. I am a noob, admittedly. I find these
things hard. And yet I got git to work and work well for my purposes.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the sword-devel