U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Re: SVN plan... [message #12431 is a reply to message #12428]

Tue, 30 October 2007 12:13

mdelfede
Messages: 1308
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

luzr wrote on Tue, 30 October 2007 11:10

Well, just wanted to announce the current idea w.r.t. versioning system(s).

The basic idea is to go SVN way in the future, including TheIDE support.

Quote:

Anyway, as there are some SVN features I am not very happy about, I will try somewhat more complicated (and expensive) approach.

So in the end, we might create "Uvs3", which would solve these troubles:

- .svn directories in the source tree
- automatic detection of delete/rename -> so that in the end, we have "single click" solution available (makes smart check/commit).
- some sort of local repository to browse at least some revisions (not necessarily all in SVN repository).

Well, here just a thought... That depends on *what* you want to do with svn. If it's just a way to distribute daily snapshots to all people, you can keep using uvs2, and I could make some scripts for you that keeps svn on sourceforge up-to-date with your uvs2 repo. OR I could update the repo by myself.
It seems to me that you like much your uvs2... so why change ?

OTOH, if you want to use the repository for a collaborative development.... things change. IMHO svn is not perfect but does a quite good job. I usually prefere the idea of a central repository, but that doesn't block you to have a local read-only copy to make tests. Automate a simple task such adding new files is a matter of 1-liner script. If you want to automate deletions too, that becomes a bit more complicated, but it's no problem too. For renames, I'd leave it manual.
To resume, svn is rock solid and quite easy to use, even not perfect.
As I told you before, I also tested mercurial, is quite good and modern design, solves many svn/uvs caveats but... It uses local repositories. Nothing bad *if* all developers keep sharing their repos, *very* bad if they don't.
There are also some GUIs for it, and it's not difficult to put a shared repo on sourceforge, neither... it must just be uploaded with ftp (or maybe rsync, I think). So you'd have your local repo and could put an updated copy on sourceforge. IMHO Git and Bazaar work the same way, with local repos, with the disadvantage that they're not so developed as mercurial on windows platform.

Quote:

Now before being accused about wasting resources on this.....

I think you can "waste" your resources as you like... Open Source programming is mostly for fun!

Ciao

Max

Report message to a moderator