[Geany-devel] Git switch

[Lex Trotman]

Sorry to serial post, I didn't see that Enrico had already replied.

On 13 June 2010 05:30, Jiří Techet <techet at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/6/12 Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger at uvena.de>:
>> On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 17:09:49 +0100, Nick wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 15:11:48 +0200
>>> Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz at student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Am 09.06.2010 03:40, schrieb Lex Trotman:
>>> > > Sure its easier if everyone is using git, but ATM this is an SVN
>>> > > project.
>>> >
>>> > Although most, if not all, geany developers use git, don't they?
>>>
>>> Do you mean git-svn? The Git repo is not writable.
>>>
>>> I don't use Git for Geany, but wouldn't mind if everyone else wants to
>>> switch to it.
>>
>> Me neither.
>> If we want, we can switch to GIT.
>>
>> Since my experience with GIT is very limited so far, I don't mind which
>> way we want to go and how to organise the repository regarding branch
>> strategies and such.
>> The only requirement/wish I have that we don't host the repository on
>> gitorious or github or such social coding platforms, that sucks.
>
> Well, I have no experience with repo.or.cz, but my feeling is that
> this is just a "classical" type of hosting where contributors cannot
> easily create their own clones and have them hosted.

Yes, I can't see where you can set up cloned repos except as complete
new projects.
Also AFAICT Sourceforge only allows them to be created by shell access

To me, letting anyone create public cloned branches without bothering
the project maintainers is one of the major features to look for.  As
an example consider the current session management situation, one
option is in a branch which the maintainers had to allow, one is a set
of patches.  With the cloned branch feature both Eugene and Ditmar
could have created their own branch repo, without bothering
Nick/Enrico, and made their changes visible so others could just grab
their repos by git clone, try them and keep their local branch up to
date by git pull.

Then they might be merged, or one chosen and pulled into the main
repo, thats a non-technical question, but the VCS and host don't get
in the way.

Communication would be still via the geany-devel mailing list, you
don't need to use any of the other features.

As I'm looking at potential hosting services for the first time,
Gitorious and Github don't actually look to me to be any more socially
oriented than sourceforge, both seem to emphasise hosting and then
offer other apps as well just like sourceforge.  Certainly their
public face tries to be friendlier whereas sourceforge is a bit
austere, but thats probably because they are just newer and trying to
increase their patronage.

Myself I'm a
> hater of anything that has "social" in its title and all the chatting
> nonsense (facebook, skype, ICQ to name some

+1 :)

), but gitorious and github
> are much more "useful" than "social".
>
> This choice will also influence the workflow in which you will use
> git. If contributors cannot have their branches hosted easily, then
> the the Linus model (one pusher pulling from contributors) will be
> harder to realize.

In fact without it, the equivalent of SVN branches for long lived
changes is harder.  Either the maintainers have to set up a new repo
or the contributor has to set up a complete new project.  Very few
people can or would want to make their local repo available publicly.

Cheers
Lex

>
> Regards,
>
> Jiri
> _______________________________________________
> Geany-devel mailing list
> Geany-devel at uvena.de
> http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
>