Home » Community » Coffee corner » GIT
Re: GIT essentials [message #24345 is a reply to message #24343] |
Mon, 11 January 2010 17:19   |
mr_ped
Messages: 826 Registered: November 2005 Location: Czech Republic - Praha
|
Experienced Contributor |
|
|
Well, the problem is that cloning(branching) with GIT is cheap, while with SVN it will take those 5+min. That's not good.
Then again as almost all U++ devs have limited access to SVN, and only very few people change the core of it (most of them used to old non-SVN way of syncing), they rarely run into conflicts or need of branches. Rest of us work mostly in Bazaar, which are reasonably small projects to rarely need a branch during development, and even then we would more likely create package_2 in bazaar in the very same trunk, mimicking branch behavior.
So I don't think right now there's huge benefit from using GIT.
If Mirek and other core developers have some spare time, it would probably make sense to try it out. If U++ core contributors will grow more in the future, the benefit from switch may be even greater. But right now I personally don't see this as big priority (then again I'm not core dev and rarely contributing even into bazaar, so who cares what I think ).
Also I think if you are proposing this, you should maybe try also design the work-flow model, i.e. how Mirek will remain the master of U++, yet other contributors will submit patches with GIT to him. So once he will want to try it out, he can read some ideas how it should work in U++ community. (because GIT allows many ways of cooperation)
What's puzzling *me* as non-user of git is the "pull". I understand anyone can clone repo, do his changes, prepare public commit (patch) and tell maintainer of project it's really great improvement and he should adopt it. Then comes the "pull" by maintainer from the contributor's repo? So everyone's personal repository has to be on public IP? (I find this unlikely with current U++ contributors)
I know this can be worked around by submitting patches for example trough e-mail, or by letting contributor to instead push into central repo, I'm just asking if I understand this part correctly. I think for really democratic/decentralized development (I'm NOT saying the U++ needs this, I think current way works quite ok right now, maybe in future we will need change, but not yet?) everyone should have his own repo and basically Mirek as site owner will use very likely his own repo to create official distribution, so if he does like something from somebody else, he will pull it and add to official U++. I wonder how well that works in current age of IPv4 and NATs. Maybe I misunderstood something important about DVCS/GIT?
|
|
|
 |
|
GIT
By: unodgs on Wed, 21 May 2008 22:22
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: mr_ped on Thu, 22 May 2008 09:15
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: unodgs on Thu, 22 May 2008 14:58
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: masu on Thu, 22 May 2008 15:52
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: Novo on Thu, 22 May 2008 16:20
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: tojocky on Mon, 09 June 2008 09:03
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: mirek on Mon, 09 June 2008 13:28
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: unodgs on Mon, 09 June 2008 21:19
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: mirek on Mon, 09 June 2008 21:34
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: tojocky on Mon, 09 June 2008 22:06
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: unodgs on Mon, 09 June 2008 22:11
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: mirek on Mon, 09 June 2008 23:18
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: sapiency on Sat, 12 September 2009 23:40
|
 |
 |
MERCURIAL
By: Didier on Sun, 13 September 2009 10:44
|
 |
|
Re: MERCURIAL
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: cocob on Sun, 13 September 2009 22:10
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: Didier on Sun, 13 September 2009 23:31
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: koldo on Mon, 14 September 2009 16:36
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: mirek on Mon, 14 September 2009 22:10
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: sapiency on Tue, 15 September 2009 14:01
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
|
 |
|
GIT essentials
By: kohait00 on Mon, 11 January 2010 12:00
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: mr_ped on Mon, 11 January 2010 16:13
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: mr_ped on Mon, 11 January 2010 17:19
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: Novo on Tue, 12 January 2010 06:07
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: kohait00 on Tue, 12 January 2010 11:36
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: Didier on Tue, 12 January 2010 21:28
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: Novo on Wed, 13 January 2010 05:36
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: Novo on Wed, 13 January 2010 05:49
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: Novo on Wed, 13 January 2010 06:40
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: kohait00 on Wed, 13 January 2010 09:47
|
 |
|
GIT tryout
By: kohait00 on Wed, 13 January 2010 14:47
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
By: Didier on Wed, 13 January 2010 22:55
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
By: Novo on Sun, 17 January 2010 20:25
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
By: Novo on Mon, 18 January 2010 01:21
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
By: Novo on Mon, 25 January 2010 05:32
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
|
 |
|
Re: GIT tryout
By: kohait00 on Thu, 14 January 2010 12:19
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: kohait00 on Tue, 16 February 2010 14:35
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: fudadmin on Tue, 16 February 2010 14:42
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: fudadmin on Tue, 16 February 2010 16:52
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: fudadmin on Tue, 16 February 2010 17:34
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: fudadmin on Tue, 16 February 2010 23:57
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
By: kohait00 on Thu, 19 August 2010 08:57
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT essentials
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: mr_ped on Mon, 25 January 2010 10:45
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: Didier on Mon, 25 January 2010 23:19
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: Novo on Tue, 26 January 2010 04:08
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
|
 |
|
Re: GIT
By: Novo on Wed, 27 January 2010 20:12
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Apr 27 21:38:41 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03035 seconds
|