[CMake] the switch to subversion?
Bill, Is a switch to Subversion still planned at some point in the near future for CMake? On occasion I have wanted to checkout the latest CVS from work and am reminded of the corporate firewall. =) -- Philip Lowman ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On Tuesday 23 September 2008 03:42:11 Philip Lowman wrote: > Bill, > > Is a switch to Subversion still planned at some point in the near future > for CMake? Hopefully not. > > On occasion I have wanted to checkout the latest CVS from work and am > reminded of the corporate firewall. =) You want git, believe me! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On 23. Sep, 2008, at 17:10, Andreas Schneider wrote: On Tuesday 23 September 2008 03:42:11 Philip Lowman wrote: Bill, Is a switch to Subversion still planned at some point in the near future for CMake? Hopefully not. On occasion I have wanted to checkout the latest CVS from work and am reminded of the corporate firewall. =) You want git, believe me! git rocks! ;-) ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On Tuesday 23 September 2008 16:19:05 Michael Wild wrote: > git rocks! ;-) I agree but not everyone is happy using the console for their VCS. You move to git and you alienate said people. Subversion, on the other hand, has a lots of GUI tools available for such folks. -- Cheers, Mike Arthur http://mikearthur.co.uk/ ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
Mike Arthur wrote: On Tuesday 23 September 2008 16:19:05 Michael Wild wrote: git rocks! ;-) I agree but not everyone is happy using the console for their VCS. You move to git and you alienate said people. Subversion, on the other hand, has a lots of GUI tools available for such folks. Lets not have the git/cvs/svn discussion we had in January... Here is the thread if someone wants to read it: http://www.cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2008-January/018976.html We (Kitware) have issues with moving to svn (or any other VCS) because of the way we have abused cvs. We use symbolic links on the server side to "share" kwsys with several projects. To date we have not yet found a good way to do this from svn. git is pretty much a show stopper because of the poor windows support it currently has. However, I have been told that git can easily track an svn repository. -Bill ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mike Arthur wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 23 September 2008 16:19:05 Michael Wild wrote: >>> >>> git rocks! ;-) >> >> I agree but not everyone is happy using the console for their VCS. You >> move to git and you alienate said people. Subversion, on the other hand, has >> a lots of GUI tools available for such folks. >> > Lets not have the git/cvs/svn discussion we had in January... Here is the > thread if someone wants to read it: > > http://www.cmake.org/pipermail/cmake/2008-January/018976.html > > We (Kitware) have issues with moving to svn (or any other VCS) because of > the way we have abused cvs. We use symbolic links on the server side to > "share" kwsys with several projects. To date we have not yet found a good > way to do this from svn. svn 'external' links to repositories (not tested). Do not know what is the default behavior for branching... 2cts -- Mathieu ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
Mathieu Malaterre wrote: svn 'external' links to repositories (not tested). Do not know what is the default behavior for branching... Yup, but there are issues with that. For one thing you can not do an atomic commit from the top of the tree and have it go into the sub project correctly. From here: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.advanced.externals.html "The support that exists for externals definitions in Subversion remains less than ideal, though. ... And Subversion still truly operates only on nondisjoint working copies. So, for example, if you want to commit changes that you've made in one or more of those external working copies, you must run svn commit explicitly on those working copies—committing on the primary working copy will not recurse into any external ones." Also, it would mean converting ITK, VTK, ParaView and CMake all at the same time So what we need is a way to bridge CVS to SVN until all projects have been moved. And we need to figure out a way to deal with the external stuff in a way that works. Basically, it is a bunch of work for us to move... I am not saying we won't, but there are still details to work out. -Bill ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Bill Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > >> >> svn 'external' links to repositories (not tested). Do not know what is >> the default behavior for branching... >> > > Yup, but there are issues with that. For one thing you can not do an atomic > commit from the top of the tree and have it go into the sub project > correctly. > > From here: > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.advanced.externals.html > > "The support that exists for externals definitions in Subversion remains > less than ideal, though. ... And Subversion still truly operates only on > nondisjoint working copies. So, for example, if you want to commit changes > that you've made in one or more of those external working copies, you must > run svn commit explicitly on those working copies—committing on the primary > working copy will not recurse into any external ones." Nasty... -- Mathieu ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On Tuesday 23 September 2008 18:10:05 Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > svn 'external' links to repositories (not tested). Do not know what is > the default behavior for branching... I'd stay away from svn:externals. We used those extensively in my company, and they are a bother. E.g, branching doesn't work too well with externals. We have also started using git, and that is much nicer than svn. But as you say, windows support might be an issue. Since the issues are founded in the limitations of windows, I doubt this will be resolved soon.( Fortunately for me, windows is something that happens to other people :p ) -- kind regards, Esben ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
. Original Message ... On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:21:47 -0400 "Bill Hoffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > >> >> svn 'external' links to repositories (not tested). Do not know what is >> the default behavior for branching... >> > >Yup, but there are issues with that. For one thing you can not do an >atomic commit from the top of the tree and have it go into the sub >project correctly. > > From here: >http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.advanced.externals.html > >"The support that exists for externals definitions in Subversion remains >less than ideal, though. ... And Subversion still truly operates only on >nondisjoint working copies. So, for example, if you want to commit >changes that you've made in one or more of those external working >copies, you must run svn commit explicitly on those working >copies—committing on the primary working copy will not recurse into any >external ones." > >Also, it would mean converting ITK, VTK, ParaView and CMake all at the >same time > >So what we need is a way to bridge CVS to SVN until all projects have >been moved. And we need to figure out a way to deal with the external >stuff in a way that works. Basically, it is a bunch of work for us to >move... I am not saying we won't, but there are still details to work out. Yeah, svn isn't perfect... :( It's limitations aren't always bad though. Often having to commit twice when using svn:externals reminds you that other people are using the repository as well. You can also peg your app on a particular version or rev of the external repository which is very useful. SVN:externals is annoying during updates (kinda slows things down) and immediately after making a branch or tag you have to remember to do a propedit if you're tracking the trunk of an svn:externals repository, but other than that it's not that bad. :) I haven't used git but have heard good things about it. It sounds like a bad choice for CMake if there aren't any good Windows clients, though. -- Philip Lowman ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
Given the fact that you know Bryan O'Sullivan, you should be considering Mercurial. ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
Esben Mose Hansen wrote: On Tuesday 23 September 2008 18:10:05 Mathieu Malaterre wrote: svn 'external' links to repositories (not tested). Do not know what is the default behavior for branching... I'd stay away from svn:externals. We used those extensively in my company, and they are a bother. E.g, branching doesn't work too well with externals. We have also started using git, and that is much nicer than svn. But as you say, windows support might be an issue. Since the issues are founded in the limitations of windows, I doubt this will be resolved soon. Don't be so sure. There are quite a few people wanting and working on a native Git port for Windows. OTOH, the Cygwin-port of Git works very nice. ( Fortunately for me, windows is something that happens to other people :p ) ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
Am Mittwoch, 24. September 2008 schrieb Jesper Eskilson: > Don't be so sure. There are quite a few people wanting and working on a > native Git port for Windows. > > OTOH, the Cygwin-port of Git works very nice. > > ( Fortunately for > > > me, windows is something that happens to other people :p ) > Hm, never used cygwin for git but this native compiled version: http://code.google.com/p/msysgit which might be the one you refer to. It isn't the official windows git release. However, it works fine for me so far. Best, -- Maik PS: I started using git and mercurial some time ago. But at this time I wasn't this familiar with the command line and git-gui provided what I was looking for. However, I would be fine with mercurial as well. ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
Re: [CMake] the switch to subversion?
On Tuesday 23 September 2008, E. Wing wrote: > Given the fact that you know Bryan O'Sullivan, you should be > considering Mercurial. It also has better Windows support and good docs (hg book) Alex ___ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
