Author Topic: My plans for the website tools (Read 22927 times)

devlin · « **Reply #15 on:** March 18, 2011, 06:48:04 pm »

Quote from: "Laurent"

Yep, sounds good. However I hope that it won't become too complicated to retrieve and compile all those separate things, compared to the current situation where everything is at the same place.

You could issue a pull into the master on every major version (i.e. 2.0, 3.0 etc) or the maintainer of the binding could issue a push-request to master (which you then accept or not) when the binding is supposedly stable? Kinda like how Torvalds does it with Linux.

Any thoughts on user-made addons in all of this?

Laurent · « **Reply #16 on:** March 18, 2011, 08:45:54 pm »

Quote

May I ask what Git tool you are using (given you even work with Windows)?

Both TortoiseGIT and command line. TortoiseGIT is convenient when you have a strong Windows/TortoiseSVN background, but you soon realize that:
- things that require 20 clicks can be done in 2 or 3 commands maximum, without moving your hand all around the desktop to reach the buttons
- complicated actions are more error-prone with a GUI than with command line + vim

xazax · « **Reply #17 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:11:45 pm »

A bit off topic but can TortoiseSVN and TortoiseGIT be installed side by side without any issue?

Tank · « **Reply #18 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:12:19 pm »

Quote from: "Laurent"

- complicated actions are more error-prone with a GUI than with command line + vim

Which ones for example? Just wondering (not flaming

) what actions you could mean since I never felt like needing a GUI. Even the CLI has some interactive command versions that can be used.

Laurent · « **Reply #19 on:** March 18, 2011, 10:36:03 pm »

Quote

A bit off topic but can TortoiseSVN and TortoiseGIT be installed side by side without any issue?

Yes. I have them both at work and at home, and there's no conflict or problem between them.

Quote

Which ones for example? Just wondering (not flaming ) what actions you could mean since I never felt like needing a GUI. Even the CLI has some interactive command versions that can be used.

Interactive rebasing, and in general anything which is about editing/moving/merging commits.

Groogy · « **Reply #20 on:** March 18, 2011, 11:43:23 pm »

Just thinking for the bindings part.

So that would mean I place my own repo on github right? Talking all about these pull request and etc. etc. I only used Git just like how I use SVN. So seems like I've missed out much huh? Well when you've decided if you want the bindings in their own repo or in the SFML2 repo I'll bet I'll have a thousand questions ^^

Laurent · « **Reply #21 on:** March 19, 2011, 10:03:37 am »

Quote

Well when you've decided if you want the bindings in their own repo or in the SFML2 repo I'll bet I'll have a thousand questions ^^

I know

Don't worry, when something is decided I'll make as easy as possible for bindings maintainers.

Hiura · « **Reply #22 on:** March 19, 2011, 02:31:48 pm »

Sounds great!!

I've been working with git during the last months and I love it!

coolhome · « **Reply #23 on:** March 19, 2011, 07:43:17 pm »

This is awesome! GIT is so much better then SVN. I used to like SMF but now I like MyBB (Free) and XenForo (Paid) for forum system. Oh well at least SMF is better then phpbb!

Klaim · « **Reply #24 on:** March 20, 2011, 11:28:44 pm »

Hi!

Laurent, just to be sure : you could have choose Mercurial. Why did you choose Git in the end?

I suspect two main reasons, please correct and complete my assumptions:

1. You're now used to git : as you said you use git now so maybe you didn't need to use mercurial and just used what you use everyday.
2. GitHub is really nice and there is no real challenger yet for it, as the collaborative features are still not matched by BitBucket, Google Code, etc...

If there are other reasons I'd like to know. I've tried essentially Mercurial because it's so much easier to learn than git and have less compatibility problem than Git on Windows (because it relies a lot on a linux environnement).

I suspect this last point to not be up to date. But I'm not informed enough. So I'm interested in any informations about the decisions to choose one or the other (or Bazaar and other alternatives).

Laurent · « **Reply #25 on:** March 21, 2011, 07:41:52 am »

Honestly I'm not going to compare every single versionning system that exists. Git is a popular choice, it does exactly what I need, and I'm very comfortable with it.

Quote

I've tried essentially Mercurial because it's so much easier to learn than git and have less compatibility problem than Git on Windows (because it relies a lot on a linux environnement).

Git works on top of cygwin on Windows.

Quote

So I'm interested in any informations about the decisions to choose one or the other (or Bazaar and other alternatives).

Should be easier if people experienced with other systems tell me why I should consider choosing another one

Klaim · « **Reply #26 on:** March 21, 2011, 11:29:50 am »

Ok no problem I understand your choice and it's good.

Quote

Git works on top of cygwin on Windows.

Yes. It's still unperfect because of this.

There is also a lot of errors occuring in git that don't give any feedback, but it seems to be fine as far as you don't do "ninja tricks".

About choosing mercurial instead of git, I did it because 1. it's easier to understand (but that's only a timing problem if you're going into git I guess) 2. it's done with python so it's easily extensible, cross-platform by nature etc.

In fact I followed the research made by the OGRE3D guy that are available on his blog - he now sells a MacOS tool for managing repositories (git,mercurial,svn) (read the previous related articles too for details). I recommand the reading to understand the forces and weakness of each at the time. Note that for example Gitorious isn't now as interesting as GitHub, because of GitHub community developpement tools.

I personally think that GitHub is excellent, so I'd like to use git more but it require clearly more learning time than Mercurial that mostly do the same but without a GitHub. Google Code and BitBucket are currently enough for my open source projects so that's ok for now.

As I don't like to be dependant on one tool for the same problem, I try to learn the others when I have a project that might benefit from it, so I read a lot about those things, just to understand the alternatives, that's why I was asking.

It seems that the boost people will go to git again, so I might force myself to be familiar to both Mercurial and Git for all my projects.

What's too bad, as the Ogre guy said, is that it seems possible to make something as powerfull and cross-platform than a mix of Git and Mercurial and that would have a GitHub. But it doesn't exist XD.

Anyway, you could also find some other comparison about the two tools (and others like Bazaar (used by the ubuntu team) and Fossil (that is more for little projects, as they say themselves on the comparisont to git page) ) but I think for Mercurial and Git, the Steve's comparison might be the more pragmatic, even if you don't choose the same than him.

Laurent · « **Reply #27 on:** March 21, 2011, 11:46:08 am »

Thanks for this useful pieces of information, I'll read the blog article carefully

Tank · « **Reply #28 on:** March 21, 2011, 05:29:45 pm »

I don't get the point what's so "hard" about Git. Mostly you need exactly four commands, git-add, git-commit, git-push and git-pull. Sometimes git-rm, more often git-checkout or git-merge. All of them are well documented and easy to use (once you know how Git works!), most of them are even not worse looking them up in the docs.

devlin · « **Reply #29 on:** March 21, 2011, 06:07:16 pm »

You don't even need that if you're using windows and a decent editor. There's stuff like GitExtensions that handles everything for you (MSVC).

Author Topic: My plans for the website tools (Read 22927 times)

xazax