[ANN] bfts 1.0.0 Released

ruby-talk
21

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

I'd be happy if the CVS and SVN folks would settle their war so I don't
need to learn both. :slight_smile:

Seriously, though, I have two projects on RubyForge, one in CVS and the
other in SVN. Don't ask me why; I don't know. The only one I use
actively is the CVS one.

I can't say I'm a huge fan of either, but they're no-brainers to use for open source. Not with any other SCM could I just toss an offhand URL out and know that people would be able to handle everything. Really all I need to do to get someone involved is say "it's in SVN, here's the URL". Done and done. That's a huge advantage for getting folks involved.

And as slow as it is, the DAV-based SVN servers are just about the easiest ones to work with. Not only you can use non-SVN tools to pull files if necessary (i.e. mount as a folder if you wish) but you can poke around in an ordinary web browser. Unpleasant for day-to-day commits, but trivial to make source available to a wide audience.

···

--
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ Welcome to headius.com
headius@headius.com -- charles.nutter@sun.com

22

hrmmm... to start: slow as dirt, user unfriendly, merging is a bitch, and prone to corruption. The first two really really really bother me on a daily basis. The third not as much but is very important to me. The last one is absolutely unacceptable.

How is p4 less accessible? Easy download and works on nearly any platform under the sun.

···

On Oct 31, 2006, at 11:17 AM, Ben Bleything wrote:

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006, Ryan Davis wrote:

how about: subversion blows multicolored chunks?

plz elaborate? It works fine for me and lots of other folks. Again,
I'm not arguing with your opinion, I'm just curious. We used p4 at an
old job of mine and everyone loved it. It's just not as easily
accessable as svn.

23

ok, since this thread has veered it's head toward SCMs, I'm also
throwing in my irrelevant opinion. Git has been a most welcome
addition to my workflow: distributed, direct, easy branching and (so
far) good merging. Oh, and it has git-cvsserver that serves as a
two-way bridge for those that insist on CVS (albeit for a simple
subset of CVS commands).

It can be served read-only from an http mounted directory (although
not efficiently), and comes with a perl CGI script to view repos.

Cameron

p.s. I agree with the multicolored chunks bit.

24

hrmmm... to start: slow as dirt, user unfriendly, merging is a bitch,
and prone to corruption. The first two really really really bother me
on a daily basis. The third not as much but is very important to me.
The last one is absolutely unacceptable.

I've not noticed it to be slow or unfriendly, but I learned version
control on CVS so maybe its just that I'm used to crap. Merging *is* a
bitch, I'll give you that.

As for corruption, using an fsfs backend makes it pretty hard to corrupt
a repository except by user error. I've never seen an fsfs-backed repo
get corrupted.

How is p4 less accessible? Easy download and works on nearly any
platform under the sun.

To take my svn and your p4 repositories as an example, and assuming
darwinports, and understanding that my frustration comes from the fact
that I often want to look at your code without installing it:

my svn

···

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006, Ryan Davis wrote:
------
- sudo port install subversion
- svn co http://svn.bleything.net/somerepo

your p4
-------
- sudo port install perforce (okay so this part is the same
- The 7ish steps listed at http://zenspider.com/ZSS/Process/Perforce.html,
  including one where I wait for you to set up my user

There's also the whole "lock individual files with 'p4 edit'" thing,
which I admit is purely personal preference, but I like the svn workflow
better.

Again, not bad, just different... but in a way that does make it a pain
to adopt.

Ben

25

hrmmm... to start: slow as dirt, user unfriendly, merging is a bitch,
and prone to corruption. The first two really really really bother me
on a daily basis. The third not as much but is very important to me.
The last one is absolutely unacceptable.

I've not noticed it to be slow or unfriendly, but I learned version
control on CVS so maybe its just that I'm used to crap. Merging *is* a
bitch, I'll give you that.

Try to figure out how to emulate 'p4 describe' and make it just as fast as perforce. For that matter, 'p4 filelog', 'p4 changes', and 'p4 opened -a' (haha, you can't do that one!)

Oh! And try diffing while ignoring whitespace! HAHAHAHA Real friendly there!

As for corruption, using an fsfs backend makes it pretty hard to corrupt
a repository except by user error. I've never seen an fsfs-backed repo
get corrupted.

o rly? What backend does rails use?

my svn
------
- sudo port install subversion
- svn co http://svn.bleything.net/somerepo

your p4
-------
- sudo port install perforce (okay so this part is the same
- The 7ish steps listed at zenspider.com | by ryan davis,
  including one where I wait for you to set up my user

Yup. HUGE hurdle there... and I thought working with the brilliance that is my code would be worth that. :stuck_out_tongue: I suppose I could create a script to automate this, but it is a one time shot so I don't see it being worth that. I guess I should consider it a bozo filter. Those people that seriously want to work on our projects will jump through our hoops. Those that don't, won't.

The svn mirror is a compromise. We'll get diffs

There's also the whole "lock individual files with 'p4 edit'" thing,
which I admit is purely personal preference, but I like the svn workflow
better.

That is a feature and a damned good one I wish svn had. "Oh? Eric is working on this file? Maybe I should talk to him before I go ripping stuff up!" Communication. What software development is REALLY about...

Again, not bad, just different... but in a way that does make it a pain
to adopt.

bah

···

On Oct 31, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Ben Bleything wrote:

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006, Ryan Davis wrote:

26

As for corruption, using an fsfs backend makes it pretty hard
to corrupt a repository except by user error. I've never
seen an fsfs-backed repo get corrupted.

FWIW, all the RubyForge svn repos are fsfs.

Yours,

Tom

27

Try to figure out how to emulate 'p4 describe' and make it just as
fast as perforce. For that matter, 'p4 filelog', 'p4 changes', and
'p4 opened -a' (haha, you can't do that one!)

granted

Oh! And try diffing while ignoring whitespace! HAHAHAHA Real friendly
there!

also granted

o rly? What backend does rails use?

No idea. If it's at rubyforge, fsfs apparently.

Yup. HUGE hurdle there... and I thought working with the brilliance
that is my code would be worth that. :stuck_out_tongue: I suppose I could create a
script to automate this, but it is a one time shot so I don't see it
being worth that. I guess I should consider it a bozo filter. Those
people that seriously want to work on our projects will jump through
our hoops. Those that don't, won't.

Not a hurdle. You just asked why it's harder to adopt... 8 steps vs. 2
steps... even if those 8 steps are easy (which they are!). Speaking of
which, look for an email from me soon to get set up :stuck_out_tongue:

That is a feature and a damned good one I wish svn had. "Oh? Eric is
working on this file? Maybe I should talk to him before I go ripping
stuff up!" Communication. What software development is REALLY about...

Yup, again, personal preference. I don't miss it because I've never
needed it. Ask me again once I have and I'm sure I'll be on your side.

>Again, not bad, just different... but in a way that does make it a
>pain to adopt.

bah

I agree.

Ben

···

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006, Ryan Davis wrote:

28

There's also the whole "lock individual files with 'p4 edit'" thing,
which I admit is purely personal preference, but I like the svn workflow
better.

That is a feature and a damned good one I wish svn had. "Oh? Eric is working on this file? Maybe I should talk to him before I go ripping stuff up!" Communication. What software development is REALLY about...

Interesting. The kind of Communication I remember as the
staple of locking-style VC projects went something like this:
"Bob, I need access to frobozz.cpp, will you be checking in
soon?" "Well, I haven't changed frobozz very much, but if I
check it in it won't compile for you. I can't check it in until
I finish with XYZZY, then I'll check in all these files at once."
"Oh... well I guess I'll just modify my copy locally and merge
manually, as usual."

I *never* want to go back to that. Maybe this isn't so much
of an issue with p4, since it apparently _does_ know how to
merge changes? (The old locking-style VC systems I used didn't
know about merging at all.)

Just wondering,

Bill

···

From: "Ryan Davis" <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com>

On Oct 31, 2006, at 11:46 AM, Ben Bleything wrote:

29

As it turns out, this apparently is a hurdle. The day this thread was
new I sent you an email asking you to set me up. Haven't heard back
yet.

The email probably got lost, which obviously isn't anyone's fault, but
if it were in svn on RubyForge (for instance) we wouldn't have this
problem.

Ben

···

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006, Ryan Davis wrote:

>- The 7ish steps listed at zenspider.com | by ryan davis
>Perforce.html,
> including one where I wait for you to set up my user

Yup. HUGE hurdle there... and I thought working with the brilliance
that is my code would be worth that. :stuck_out_tongue: I suppose I could create a
script to automate this, but it is a one time shot so I don't see it
being worth that. I guess I should consider it a bozo filter. Those
people that seriously want to work on our projects will jump through
our hoops. Those that don't, won't.

30

It isn't an issue with p4. We use it at work. Even if Perforce didn't
offer free licenses for open source work, it's worth every freakin'
penny.

-austin

···

On 10/31/06, Bill Kelly <billk@cts.com> wrote:

Interesting. The kind of Communication I remember as the
staple of locking-style VC projects went something like this:
"Bob, I need access to frobozz.cpp, will you be checking in
soon?" "Well, I haven't changed frobozz very much, but if I
check it in it won't compile for you. I can't check it in until
I finish with XYZZY, then I'll check in all these files at once."
"Oh... well I guess I'll just modify my copy locally and merge
manually, as usual."

I *never* want to go back to that. Maybe this isn't so much
of an issue with p4, since it apparently _does_ know how to
merge changes? (The old locking-style VC systems I used didn't
know about merging at all.)

--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
               * austin@halostatue.ca * You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike. // halo • statue
               * austin@zieglers.ca