[sword-devel] DVCS (was Re: Project "Free Scriptures" started)
Troy A. Griffitts
scribe at crosswire.org
Wed Feb 26 09:44:52 MST 2014
While I enjoy hearing all the the praises of git from its fanbase, I don't agree with your deductions. There are at least two sword git repositories publicly available which I know about. The point is, git is a DVCS. Collaboration happens between distributed clones regardless if the source from which they fork even still exists. It shouldn't matter to a git user if the source is an svn repository, except as a matter of religion or politics. :)
When git gits to 65+% popularity among open source projects, you can start waiving the popularity flag. I am using git for some projects, even programmatically integrating into some. I don't hate git. I am just not yet comfortable enough and convinced that the pain to change the core repository exceeds the benefit, especially marked by the fact that git users can git away in their distributed repos to their hearts' content right now.
Nic, you make it sound like I've repeatedly dropped multiple patches you've tried to submit. I hope I've not been that irresponsible.
Peter, the issue with your recent commit problems is permission to directly commit freely to specific resources in the authoritative repo. I'd have this same problem setting up your perms to push directly from git. In fact, I'd have more problems in git because I don't know how :) At least I know how an svn access file works. I just need to finish your permissions properly.
On February 26, 2014 8:43:25 AM MST, Peter von Kaehne <refdoc at gmx.net> wrote:
>> 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
>> 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
>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
>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,
>I can always go back to where I started and can whenever i have a
>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
>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
>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
>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.
>sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
>Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the sword-devel