Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Community » Coffee corner » Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT
Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13175] Tue, 18 December 2007 22:48 Go to next message
unodgs is currently offline  unodgs
Messages: 1366
Registered: November 2005
Location: Poland
Ultimate Contributor

http://pl.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8

[Updated on: Tue, 18 December 2007 22:49]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13181 is a reply to message #13175] Wed, 19 December 2007 13:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mr_ped is currently offline  mr_ped
Messages: 825
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha
Experienced Contributor
Impressive. And IMHO not really funny. Razz Laughing
It's more sad than funny. Smile

I'm used to SVN and very much like it, but that's mostly because I have full control over my own repository and because the number of people committing is limited and could be managed in decent time.
But I see where his hate for CVS-like is coming from and he has some very good points.

I will have to take some closer look on GIT after this, to get some real experience about different approach to code versioning.

Thanks for the link. Smile

[Updated on: Wed, 19 December 2007 14:00]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13460 is a reply to message #13181] Wed, 09 January 2008 19:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
hi,
First of all, happy New Year to all.
Once again Embarassed sorry for my lengthy disappearance, part of which was my "ugly stupidity" (but even stronger as in Linus's speech) of not having a proper system of backups and version control. I've never imagined before that hard disks can malfunction and, eventually, die so frequently...
Positive result, though, I've got a new PC ( HP T7200 2Gb 2Ghz Core Duo tablet (...until Apple starts releasing tablets or I'll use my experience to hackintosh (I've got Apple licence)) which is able to rebuild all upp ide in ~30sec(!) instead of ~40 min 256MB Athlon 2800+.
The great thing about Linus's speech (thanks, uno, for the link!) that it opened my eyes or, actually, confirmed my gut feelings, that the notion "distributed" will dominate the world for the next coming years or even decades. Autocracy and related paradigms must die. "God" and "Central" is against the nature and evolution. (God is God when distributed? Smile ). Web 3.0 should reflect those changes. Wikipedia (as it is now) and centralized wikis should die. Progress and evolution can be most effective amongst groups of peers.
Conclusion and future dreams:
1. uppsrc under DVC (Distributed Version Control) (I'll definetely make my branches public after I make order with my home and hosted networks). Anyone else has done already (apart from Mirek's) or wants to follow?
2. Topic++ and forums connected, under DVC and accesible from theIde (does anyone want to investigate Rebol?)

Some technical (political?) questions:
1. Why uvs2 is not shipped with upp installation package, not on upp sourceforge, not on U++ webpages (or am I blind?) ?
2. how much does uvs2 compare to git (or needs changes to be better)?
3. what would be needed to use uvs2 for a "distributed system" (only setup FTP servers and exchange settings)?

Regards, Aris
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13463 is a reply to message #13460] Wed, 09 January 2008 21:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
fudadmin wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 13:09


1. Why uvs2 is not shipped with upp installation package, not on upp sourceforge, not on U++ webpages (or am I blind?) ?



Because we are feeling guilty about it...

Quote:


2. how much does uvs2 compare to git (or needs changes to be better)?



Not much. Solves problem of sharing sources between a low number of very active developers that only have ftp server...

Quote:


3. what would be needed to use uvs2 for a "distributed system" (only setup FTP servers and exchange settings)?



A start from the scratch IMO.

Mirek

P.S.: Welcome back again Smile

[Updated on: Wed, 09 January 2008 21:58]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13465 is a reply to message #13463] Thu, 10 January 2008 01:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
luzr wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 20:58

fudadmin wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 13:09


1. Why uvs2 is not shipped with upp installation package, not on upp sourceforge, not on U++ webpages (or am I blind?) ?



Because we are feeling guilty about it...


1. Is that guilt more important than a chance to be useful for existing and new U++ users?
2. Is it that bad that ... but why then you are using on a grand scale for U++ yourself?
3. Why no other version control system is recommended on the website?
4. Guilty of what? Comunist system inheritance? Wink I still remember uvs2 from my short experience that it is nicely useable with theIde. A product which potentially could promote U++ or at least to be appreciated by "ugly stupid uneducated" U++ users like me, or to be a starting point for new versions developements.
And, honestly, I stopped using it after similarly "guilty ugly" Mirek's comments somewhere in these forums.

OTOH, the second great point and observation from Linus's speech is that... If Mirek had at least 10% of Linus's "positively ugly agressive dictionary"..., U++ would be in front of "ugly fatty stupid wxWidgets" and not "unknown, deleted and once again scheduled for deletion from "half-porn" origins Wikipedia -
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sect ors/media/article774973.ece. But that's separate topics.

So, any chance to overcome that guilt and put uvs2 into e.g sourceforge uppdev tree? Smile

luzr wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 20:58

fudadmin wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 13:09


2. how much does uvs2 compare to git (or needs changes to be better)?



Not much. Solves problem of sharing sources between a low number of very active developers that only have ftp server...



1. What would be needed to improve the situation?
2. Shell I offer an ftp server with 10 accounts?

luzr wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 20:58

fudadmin wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 13:09


3. what would be needed to use uvs2 for a "distributed system" (only setup FTP servers and exchange settings)?



A start from the scratch IMO.


1. 2 weeks as for Linus? Smile
2. What if to combine uvs2(3?) (theIde?, too?) and mercurial.
3. I'm starting to invest some time into uvs2 (first of all finding...) and/or mercurial (already installed it), anyway.
4. Depending on your answers and community response I'll start new topics in appropriate sections. I want order with my sources!

Quote:


P.S.: Welcome back again Smile


Really appreciate that.
Aris
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13468 is a reply to message #13465] Thu, 10 January 2008 07:54 Go to previous messageGo to next message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
ok, I've found old uvs2 (v2.36). Before syncing I'll try to read forums (already noticed some topics) and docs (if any) and then ask some more questions...
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13471 is a reply to message #13465] Thu, 10 January 2008 12:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1307
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
fudadmin wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 01:31


2. Is it that bad that ... but why then you are using on a grand scale for U++ yourself?


from what I've seen on UVS2, it makes it difficult to go back through versions (maybe I'm wrong, but I think so). So, if you post wrong code, it can be time consuming to sync it again.
Quote:


3. Why no other version control system is recommended on the website?


Well, now there's svn updated quite often, if you need to get the last code. A development trunk for external contributions could be opened and kept in sync by somebody having write access to uvs2 repository. I'd keep the main svn trunk exactly in sync with uvs one, as is it now, but I see no problem to open another branch.
Of course, that'll make a bit difficult to keep all in sync, but can be done.
The only real problem I see is that, with sourceforge svn you can't open a single branch for write access (IMO), so who has write access to the development branch has write access to main branc too.
Quote:


..............
1. What would be needed to improve the situation?


a miracle ? Smile
Seriously speaking, as Mirek told, I see UVS as a mean for very *few* active developers to share code. As is it done, with many developers with write access it could be cumbersome to mantain.
Quote:


2. What if to combine uvs2(3?) (theIde?, too?) and mercurial.


I've looked inside mercurial for a while and it seems good stuff, but it has (IMHO) the weakness of all distributed versionin control systems. It relies mostly on active code shares between developers. AND, it doesn't have a merge tool embedded.
So, if 50 developers work on it, that'll be 50 different repositories with must be kept in sync. So, you'd need again a central FTP server (IMHO...) for repository sharing. OR you need the 50 developers share themselves the repo.
Linux kernel is a different stuff, it has a central developer (Linus) that join all the patches together, accepting or rejecting them. In my opinion, that's not a true decentralized system, even if it uses a decentralized versioning system.

Concluding.... I'm still thinking that a good centralized repo like svn works better for upp purpose (please, no flames about ! Smile )

Ciao

Max
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13475 is a reply to message #13175] Thu, 10 January 2008 14:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mr_ped is currently offline  mr_ped
Messages: 825
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha
Experienced Contributor
I quite agree with you about the need of central point.
Than again I quite agree with Linus about cumbersome merges in CVS and SVN.
Did you notice that if you try to merge the same commit from other branch two times, the SVN goes hairwire instead of ignoring it?
Yes, it's user mistake to try to merge the same changes two times over code base, but the practical implications do result into "strong opinion". Very Happy

So if there is free versioning system with better merge tools than SVN+TortoiseSVN (the tortoise merge is not bad to see changes, but far from "the" artificially intelligent merge tool which would do much of (obvious) merge work for you - I would go for it.

I didn't try GIT yet, so I'm not sure how smooth the merges are there. IF they are really as nice as Linus advocates, it would be probably easier to force Mirek be a "Linus" for upp and having his repository as "central" one, than to fight with SVN later, if the user base grows (and I think it will grow.. maybe not fast, but so far every year there are more people here using upp).

I think the basic choice about centralized vs distributed is about how many contributors to core upp we expect in future. Whether Mirek wants to keep it as his personal piece of SW with few core developers, or he wants to release upp into wild and let everybody do with it whatever he wants, and than upon popular request merging those improvements back into official version.
(well, the upp license already allows anybody to take the sources and do whatever they wish with them, but the process of propagating those changes back to official release is not defined at all, and works on good taste+political skills in forums+mood of Mirek or Unodogs. This view is probably not very encouraging for new developers to [try to] contribute directly to core.)
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13476 is a reply to message #13475] Thu, 10 January 2008 16:24 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1307
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
mr_ped wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 14:04

I quite agree with you about the need of central point.
Than again I quite agree with Linus about cumbersome merges in CVS and SVN.
Did you notice that if you try to merge the same commit from other branch two times, the SVN goes hairwire instead of ignoring it?


No, I didn't but I can imagine that Smile
Well, outside svn I use 'meld', but it works only on Linux. It's a really good diff/merge program.

Quote:


Yes, it's user mistake to try to merge the same changes two times over code base, but the practical implications do result into "strong opinion". Very Happy


yes, such mistakes are very common.... svn should behave better on them.

Quote:


So if there is free versioning system with better merge tools than SVN+TortoiseSVN (the tortoise merge is not bad to see changes, but far from "the" artificially intelligent merge tool which would do much of (obvious) merge work for you - I would go for it.


Me too. I'd like a centralized versioning system with a really good merge tool, but there isn't any yet. But it can be done as I do, with SVN and an external merge tool. Not too confortable, bt better than nothing...

Quote:


I didn't try GIT yet, so I'm not sure how smooth the merges are there. IF they are really as nice as Linus advocates, it would be probably easier to force Mirek be a "Linus" for upp and having his repository as "central" one, than to fight with SVN later, if the user base grows (and I think it will grow.. maybe not fast, but so far every year there are more people here using upp).

I think the basic choice about centralized vs distributed is about how many contributors to core upp we expect in future. Whether Mirek wants to keep it as his personal piece of SW with few core developers, or he wants to release upp into wild and let everybody do with it whatever he wants, and than upon popular request merging those improvements back into official version.


I'm in favour of a centralized system because with a decentralized one it's too easy that a developer forget to sync/merge to other's repos. Keeping a centralized ftp repo with mercurial would be better, but it depends everytime of the syncs from each developer. Which has to sync their repos, then ftp them on central site. I'm afraid of what would happen if 2 developers transfer at the same time their repos on ftp....

I guess for the moment the best would be a svn repo with a main 'stable' trunk, updated only by Mirek or a few developers, and some development branches to accept contibutions.
But that one can't be on sourceforge *or* you must accept the risk of giving write access to the full svn repo to everybody.

Ciao

Max
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13477 is a reply to message #13465] Thu, 10 January 2008 17:30 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
fudadmin wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 19:31

luzr wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 20:58

fudadmin wrote on Wed, 09 January 2008 13:09


1. Why uvs2 is not shipped with upp installation package, not on upp sourceforge, not on U++ webpages (or am I blind?) ?



Because we are feeling guilty about it...


4. Guilty of what? Comunist system inheritance? Wink I still remember uvs2 from my short experience that it is nicely useable with theIde. A product which potentially could promote U++ or at least to be appreciated by "ugly stupid uneducated" U++ users like me, or to be a starting point for new versions developements.



Well, I have been told that Uvs2 is a bad idea so many times that I started to believe it Wink

Anyway, reason 2 why it is not "public" is limited bandwidth of my home ftp server.

Mirek

Quote:


U++ would be in front of "ugly fatty stupid wxWidgets" and not "unknown, deleted and once again scheduled for deletion from "half-porn" origins Wikipedia -
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sect ors/media/article774973.ece. But that's separate topics.



Already tried that. Does not work.

Quote:


So, any chance to overcome that guilt and put uvs2 into e.g sourceforge uppdev tree? Smile



It is in uppbox (together with other developer tools, like releaser).

Quote:


2. What if to combine uvs2(3?) (theIde?, too?) and mercurial.



One suggested plan was to make uvs3 as smart frontend to svn.

Mirek
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13478 is a reply to message #13475] Thu, 10 January 2008 17:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
mr_ped wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 08:04

Whether Mirek wants to keep it as his personal piece of SW with few core developers, or he wants to release upp into wild and let everybody do with it whatever he wants, and than upon popular request merging those improvements back into official version.
(well, the upp license already allows anybody to take the sources and do whatever they wish with them, but the process of propagating those changes back to official release is not defined at all, and works on good taste+political skills in forums+mood of Mirek or Unodogs. This view is probably not very encouraging for new developers to [try to] contribute directly to core.)



Well, you have to take into consideration that we use U++ for bussines, including some quite critical code. We have to do all we can to avoid big failures.

Anyway, "good taste+political skills in forums+mood of Mirek or Unodogs", does not sound too bad to me (perhaps with the exception of "mood"). Was not Linux developed in the same way?

Mirek
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13481 is a reply to message #13471] Thu, 10 January 2008 18:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
Big thanks for your very informative answers.
[quote title=mdelfede wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 11:16
...The only real problem I see is that, with sourceforge svn you can't open a single branch for write access (IMO), so who has write access to the development branch has write access to main branch too
...
Max[/quote]
etc. etc.

mr_ped wrote


...and works on good taste+political skills in forums+mood of Mirek or Unodogs. This view is probably not very encouraging for new developers to [try to] contribute directly to core.)



That means, I'm not alone who noticed that... Smile

So, branches are discouraged "not only by political but also by technical centralized autocratic upp project management nature and theIde version control unfriendliness"? like during good Soviet times Smile

So, only not very skilled users are welcome.

Because skilled ones, after facing U++'s theIde and libraries quite huge limitations will want to adjust it for their own needs and contribute, but instead, will be forced to waste time going through politics (as in most projects), also own branches maintenance hell due to theIde nature (which even can't follow symlinks and MS shortcuts as a possible mechanism for switching between those branches), or silently watch and wait, or even leave (where is hojtsy e.g?)?

Imagine an impact on U++ populiarity if it had its own made that versioning-merging tool we and many world programmers are all dreaming about!

Conclusions, or back to reality from all of yours points:
1. I can try (starting tonight) to create a separate public subversion repository with write access branches for all wanting to share contributions U++ friends, if
A. you really think that mercurial can't be used for a central repository role (and Linus is wrong, as he is about C++...)
B. Mirek or others can't offer any better alternatives soon.

What do you think?

P.S I'm convinced that a fork of U++ would be a huge waste of small resources, not comparable to a Mozart of C++ (Mirek) and should be forgotten until Mirek is alive Smile
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13483 is a reply to message #13481] Thu, 10 January 2008 18:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1307
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
fudadmin wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 18:14

Big thanks for your very informative answers.
mdelfede wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 11:16


...The only real problem I see is that, with sourceforge svn you can't open a single branch for write access (IMO), so who has write access to the development branch has write access to main branch too
...
Max

etc. etc.


you're wellcome Very Happy

Quote:


That means, I'm not alone who noticed that... Smile

So, branches are discouraged "not only by political but also by technical centralized autocratic upp project management nature and theIde version control unfriendliness"? like during good Soviet times Smile
ecc ecc....



You should maybe think also that theide (and upp) is quite stable because of its controlled development cycle.
Nobody is telling you that you can't share your patches and/or send to developers.... what you can't to is to fiddle directly with main code repo.
I must say that, being upp used by commercial development by Mirek & C, I agree fully with their restricted access to main repo. That's what, more or less, is doing Linus with linux kernel, too.
Besides of last year 2-3 crashes I had in Linux version (due mostly to lack of testing on Linux), I run daily theide (last uvs version) with absolutel *no* crashes at all.
I tried kdevelop times ago, and it was not half as stable as theide.

Quote:


Imagine an impact on U++ populiarity if it had its own made that versioning-merging tool we and many world programmers are all dreaming about!


and imagine the loss of popularity of U++ if theide would hang every 3 minutes due to badly tested code patches....

Quote:


Conclusions, or back to reality from all of yours points:
1. I can try (starting tonight) to create a separate public subversion repository with write access branches for all wanting to share contributions U++ friends....


that would be a great idea, IF you could keep that repo in sync with uvs development, along with users provided patches... if you have a lot of spare time, that'll really great stuff Smile

Ciao

Max
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13484 is a reply to message #13175] Thu, 10 January 2008 18:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
Quote:

It is in uppbox (together with other developer tools, like releaser).


from https://upp.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/upp I only get
======
/.svn/
/bazaar/
/examples/
/reference/
/tutorial/
/uppsrc/
=======
Any ideas?
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13485 is a reply to message #13481] Thu, 10 January 2008 19:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
zsolt is currently offline  zsolt
Messages: 693
Registered: December 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Contributor
fudadmin wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 18:14



So, branches are discouraged "not only by political but also by technical centralized autocratic upp project management nature and theIde version control unfriendliness"? like during good Soviet times Smile

So, only not very skilled users are welcome.



I can not agree...

I think, the main advantages of U++ are it's very clean design and clean source code.
The result of allowing a lot of developers writing the repositry can be a hacked unstable trash. Just compare the development methods of some died projects to some flourishing projects.

You can write clean code, fitting into the concepts of UPP and it can be part of it (my observation).

OTOH, it would be benefical to create some infrastructure to maintain a list of contributed modules (packages).
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13486 is a reply to message #13485] Thu, 10 January 2008 19:18 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1307
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
zsolt wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 19:11


OTOH, it would be benefical to create some infrastructure to maintain a list of contributed modules (packages).



Here I strongly agree. A common place where tu put patches and code snippets/add-on would be great.
Maybe some http stuff where people can upload the code in zip format along with a description of what it is.
Bazaar in svn is not enough, IMHO.

Ciao

Max

Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13488 is a reply to message #13485] Thu, 10 January 2008 19:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
fudadmin is currently offline  fudadmin
Messages: 1321
Registered: November 2005
Location: Kaunas, Lithuania
Ultimate Contributor
Administrator
zsolt wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 18:11

fudadmin wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 18:14



So, branches are discouraged "not only by political but also by technical centralized autocratic upp project management nature and theIde version control unfriendliness"? like during good Soviet times Smile

So, only not very skilled users are welcome.



I can not agree...

I think, the main advantages of U++ are it's very clean design and clean source code.
The result of allowing a lot of developers writing the repositry can be a hacked unstable trash. Just compare the development methods of some died projects to some flourishing projects.

You can write clean code, fitting into the concepts of UPP and it can be part of it (my observation).




I'm not talking about "to write to the main (Mirek's) branch".
I'm talking about a mechanism which whould enable quite average c++ programmers to be encouraged and empowered to contribute and, more importantly, to exchange U++ patches or branches in a more effective way than to post and search on forums!!!
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13489 is a reply to message #13486] Thu, 10 January 2008 19:36 Go to previous messageGo to next message
zsolt is currently offline  zsolt
Messages: 693
Registered: December 2005
Location: Budapest, Hungary
Contributor
I did'n know about your Bazaar repo Sad
Bazaar will be very useful, if you or somebody else maintain and regularly release it, and publish its content with detailed descriptions, I think.
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13491 is a reply to message #13175] Thu, 10 January 2008 21:04 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mr_ped is currently offline  mr_ped
Messages: 825
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha
Experienced Contributor
- what's wrong with whole svn writing rights, if the agreement will be to not commit any big change to official branch?
If anyone does commit something there, it can be rolled back, eventually he can lose svn access.
Should we be so hard even on obvious fixes of obvious defects? I would not like such policy. But if they will be allowed, who will be responsible for review of commit and accepting it as official fix? Also if Mirek will continue to work with uvs as main branch, who will merge those two "official" branches?
Also if Mirek will start to work directly on official svn branch, it may become easily unstable for couple of days ...

- stable upp core because of Mirek doing biz apps with it: that's obvious reason.

- good taste+forum politics = I was mostly pointing out the process is unofficial. Thus in similar situation it may easily lead to different results and it would be more encouraging if there would be official how-to for contributors (even if it would just describe this method).

- I think uvs2 is bad idea, because it is non-standard, and works only on limited bandwidth for limited number of people. So I think the migration to different development model would be a step forward.
But it's up to Mirek to decide which direction that forward should take. SVN? GIT? Mercurial? Bazaar (versioning system)?
Plenty of choices, each does promise a bit different future, and require quite different policies and rules.

Forking upp core doesn't look very promising to me. I can hardly imagine anyone else pushing so hard forward and so effectively as Mirek is. That means any fork would become quite obsolete within weeks, and exactly because of this evergoing big changes/refactoring to core it's difficult to maintain custom core changes if they are not merged back to official branch.

(and also core is quite complete for what it does, there's still plenty of room for improvements, but so far I didn't see people here moaning about wrong changes to core from Mirek. About missing features and fixing bugs.. those are common in forums... but the new version of core were so far very positively accepted and it looks Mirek's needs follow very good needs of others)

Forking TheIDE makes much more sense IMHO, as people may have quite different taste for what is important for IDE, and also experimenting a lot on such piece of SW makes more sense, than some crazy experiment changes to core itself.
But actually I think it's not worth of it. If there will be enough courage to do this, I would rather suggest to start TheIDE2 from scratch, as the original IDE is based on (IMHO obsolete) old concepts anyway and just "hacking it" would never move it that much away from current thing.

--- I see I'm writing lot of stuff, and quite offtopic.

So short summary what I don't like about current svn<->uvs and contributing.
I don't like the idea that if I find some obvious bug in upp (and I already did at least once IIRC), I can't simply fix and commit it. I have to write it in forum ... wait for Mirek to notice ... wait for next official release ... hope Mirek did not forgot to merge with my fix ... etc.
The current status is pretty much "Mirek is developing his UPP, and as he is very good person, he allows anyone else to download it and use it for free" (what is absolutely amazing of course).
As such the number of direct contributors to upp core will never grow too much.

I'm not saying we need to change this badly. I'm just summarizing how I see it is, and where it will lead in future. Smile
If it stays as it is, I'm not going to fork upp core just to allow me to fix little things immediately, I will rather post in forums and wait.
Re: Great (and funny) Linus' speach about GIT [message #13492 is a reply to message #13491] Thu, 10 January 2008 21:34 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1307
Registered: September 2007
Ultimate Contributor
mr_ped wrote on Thu, 10 January 2008 21:04

- what's wrong with whole svn writing rights, if the agreement will be to not commit any big change to official branch?
If anyone does commit something there, it can be rolled back, eventually he can lose svn access.


You don't take in account the possible mistakes on commits, for example. The best would be the possibility for everyone to create a branch and work on it, but avoiding the public write access to other branches. Then, it would be easy for Mirek (or some mantainer) to fetch the working patches and to merge them to the main three (or even uvs2).

Quote:


Should we be so hard even on obvious fixes of obvious defects? I would not like such policy.


I think that 'obvious' fixes are 2-3 lines of code, max. And those would be easily handled in forums. Of course, a forum dedicated to patches would be good.
Less obvious fixes, that maybe can change core behaviour, can be more dangerous. Just look on the time it took Mirek to accept my X11 DHctrl control, which involved many small changes in core code... and even, when he accepted it and merged it still contained a pair of nasty bugs. He was right to be worried about fiddling with core classes, I must say. Just think what could happen if anybody could fiddle with other's threes.

I'm quite happy with upp and theide as is it now.
The small caveats it has are being solved quickly, and I see the reaction against bugs are quick enough.
Maybe an added mercurial repository for code experiments on a centralized ftp server would be a good stuff, but then it needs a mantainer to keep it in sync with uvs2 as I'm trying to do now with svn repo. It's not an hard job, but it needs a person that can do it almost daily, to be effective.

If there's a volunteer here to do it, it's not too hard to find a free ftp server, build a mercurial repo synced with svn and open it to all.

Ciao

Max
Previous Topic: About vista....
Next Topic: Successfull cross-compile to ARM9, AT91SAM9263-ek
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Mar 28 22:08:52 CET 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01470 seconds