Frans, a) I can pull specific commits b) I am going to reject any changes that I don't like. c) I am going to review any code that I am pulling. d) This scenario just doesn't occur all that often. e) Even if it does, I can ask you to create a specific branch just with your changes.
On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Frans Bouma <[email protected]> wrote: > > Frans, > > There are gate keepers, and they are responsible for doing that. > > I, for example, have about 50% chance of telling the user to fix his code > > and 50% to fix the code myself. > > Remember, we are still talking about only committers being able to merge > > code to the main repo. > > sure, but if you say, pull from my repository (as you referred to > that as a plus for git), you get my changes as well. If you commit your > work, your code contains my changes as well, and thus you have to verify my > code as well. This can add up if I pulled from someone out there and didn't > verify the code. > > FB > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Frans Bouma <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > What I wondered, and what hasn't been debated (at least not this > > 'round'), > > is: how is code reviewing done? My experience with being an OSS > > maintainer > > is that it's likely people give you 'patches' which are not > matching > > how > > things should be coded, are sometimes of poor quality or cut > corners > > and you > > have to adjust them a bit to avoid a big pile of crapcode. Maybe > I'm > > too > > anal when it comes to code quality but as soon as people are able > to > > easily > > add patches to the trunk without review, it's hard to fix that > later > > on. > > E.g. if a rule about 'document what you add' is in place, how is > > checked > > that a committer indeed documented what's been added? > > > > With a distributed system, it's harder to verify what is coming > from > > where, > > if people are updating from non-master repositories: the person who > > commits > > to the master has more to commit in that case than his own changes: > > also the > > changes he pulled from a different source. How is verified those > are > > in the > > same quality? > > > > Or is there just 1 rule: if the tests run 'it's good enough' ? > > > > FB > > > > > > > +1 for github > > > > > > github is much better option than codeplex+hg (in my opinion) > > > > > > The intregated support and management of pull requests and the > > whole > > > community aspect around the source code repositories is a real > > boost to > > > contribution and easy managment. If you really prefer mercurial > > than go > > with > > > bitbucket and you get some of the good this github brings. > > > > > > From a pure capability and tooling perspective I think Mercurial > is > > a > > little > > > better (at least on windows) but I think that is compensated by > the > > how > > > great github. > > > > > > just my 2 cents. > > > /Torkel > > > > > > On 3 Nov, 13:36, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > sorry NUnit is in launchpad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Fabio Maulo > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Moq svn (Google code) > > > > > NServiceBus svn + git (Source forge + GitHub) <== Official in > > SVN > > > > > Rhino.ServiceBus git (GitHub) uNhAddIns Hg (Google code) > > > > > SharpTestsEx Hg (Code Plex) ConfORM Hg (Google Code) NUnit > svn > > > > > (SourceForge) Castle git (GitHub) Spring svn (custom) > > NHibernate svn > > > > > (SourceForge) NHibernate.Validator svn (SourceForge) > > > > > NHibernate.Spatial svn (SourceForge) NHibernate.Search svn > > > > > (SourceForge) NewtonJson svn (CodePlex) Log4Net svn (Apache) > > Lucene > > > > > svn (Apache) Re-Linq svn (custom + CodePlex only for deploy) > > ANTLR > > > > > svn (Custom) SharpMap svn (Code Plex) > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Ayende Rahien > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> I mean popular in the sense that out of the .NET projects > that > > I > > > > >> follow that uses DVCS, most use Git. > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Fabio Maulo > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>> I know lot of OSS using SVN more than Git... btw.. > > > > >>> Mercurial is supported by Bitbucket, Google Code, > > SourceForge, > > > > >>> CodePlex Please give me a more detailed definition of > > "popular" > > > > >>> since its translation in Italian and in Spanish can be > > interpreted > > > > >>> as "not used only by elite". > > > > > > > > >>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ayende Rahien > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>> Diego, > > > > >>>> I know of a LOT of OSS projects which are using Git I know > > of > > > > >>>> very few using HG. > > > > > > > > >>>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Diego Mijelshon > > > > >>>> <[email protected] > > > > >>>> > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>> Oren, > > > > > > > > >>>>> What stats do you use to say Git is more popular? > > > > >>>>> I think they both have lots of followers. > > > > > > > > >>>>> I'm slightly biased towards HG, because it has an easier > > > > >>>>> learning curve and it doesn't have the "non-native" feel > of > > Git on > > > Windows. > > > > >>>>> Regarding the specific points you mentioned: aren't those > > just > > > > >>>>> Github features whose current implementation you like > > instead of > > > > >>>>> Hg/Git differences? > > > > > > > > >>>>> In any case, here's my 2c regarding source: > > > > > > > > >>>>> - There seems to be a consensus to move to a DVCS. > > Nobody > > > > >>>>> wants to > > > > >>>>> stay with SVN > > > > >>>>> - As others said, after the release might be a good > time > > to > > > > >>>>> do the > > > > >>>>> move > > > > >>>>> - IMO, the decision should be done first by the > > committers > > > > >>>>> and, if > > > > >>>>> there isn't a clear winner, by the contributors. How > > about a > > > poll? > > > > > > > > >>>>> And regarding the site (in no particular order): > > > > > > > > >>>>> - I've said it before: the current state of NH > identity > > is > > > > >>>>> just > > > > >>>>> terrible. Searches for "nhibernate" "nhibernate > source" > > > > >>>>> "nhibernate bug > > > > >>>>> tracker" "nhibernate docs" and "nhibernate binaries" > > should > > > > >>>>> all point to a > > > > >>>>> unified site. > > > > >>>>> - I don't have anything against Jira per se, but > having > > it > > > > >>>>> redirect > > > > >>>>> to an IP is just unprofessional > > > > >>>>> - SourceForge still feels like 1999. I really like > > Google > > > > >>>>> Code, I > > > > >>>>> dislike CodePlex, and GitHub is meh. But the decision > > should > > > > >>>>> be made by > > > > >>>>> those in charge of maintaining it. > > > > > > > > >>>>> Diego > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 08:03, Ayende Rahien > > <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Frans, > > > > >>>>>> Git is more popular than hg. And we aren't considering > > > > >>>>>> centralized SCM > > > > > > > > >>>>>> And yes, there is a HUGE difference between sending a > > patch and > > > > >>>>>> sending a pull request. > > > > > > > > >>>>>> a) it is *significantly* easier to handle a pull > request, > > > > >>>>>> because it is a single command, rather than a set of > > operations > > > > >>>>>> b) it allows you to have your own fork and easily merge > > future > > > > >>>>>> changes > > > > >>>>>> c) it means that Joe can pull from you, not just from > the > > > > >>>>>> master feed > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Frans Bouma > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > I actually do have a problem with hg. I think that > Git > > is: > > > > >>>>>>> > a) more popular > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> than what, subversion? Perforce? CVS? > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > b) GitHub has tremendous pull in terms of encouraging > > > > >>>>>>> contributions. > > > > >>>>>>> > c) I saw a huge spike in the amount of people > > contributing > > > > >>>>>>> > once I > > > > >>>>>>> moved to > > > > >>>>>>> > github. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> I have a hard time believing that the scc > system > > used > > > > >>>>>>> is of any relevance whether a developer is capable of > > > > >>>>>>> contributing any code. I > > > > >>>>>>> mean: > > > > >>>>>>> it's not as if someone who changes some code in his own > > branch > > > > >>>>>>> is suddenly able to commit those changes as well: the > > change > > > > >>>>>>> has to be reviewed, tested, agreed upon and then it's > > > > >>>>>>> committed. A svn patch is just as simple for that than > > any > > > > >>>>>>> other patch. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> I don't deny what you saw on ravendb stuff, I > just > > find > > > > >>>>>>> it a 'coincidence' rather than a correlated event. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> FB > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Fabio Maulo > > > > >>>>>>> > <[email protected]> > > > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > And move the code in CodePlex... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > -- > > > > >>>>>>> > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > El 02/11/2010, a las 16:38, Jorge > > <[email protected]> > > > > >>>>>>> escribió: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > Hello there, > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > I am in the process of downloading the code > via > > SVN, > > > > >>>>>>> > and it > > > > >>>>>>> is > > > > >>>>>>> > taking > > > > >>>>>>> > > a very long time. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > Can someone please enable Git repo in > > sourceforge, > > > > >>>>>>> > or > > > > >>>>>>> better yet, > > > > >>>>>>> > move > > > > >>>>>>> > > code to Github? > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > Respectfully yours, > > > > >>>>>>> > > Jorge > > > > > > > > >>> -- > > > > >>> Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Fabio Maulo > > > > > > > > >
