Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Florian Klämpfl wrote:

Am 16.03.2015 um 13:53 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:



I fully understand that. I think the biggest resistance to migrating to
git is the "distributed system" principle. 


For me
1) it is usability, mainly the gui, well, and other stuff like the 
un-memorizable hashes.
2) too much freedom :) svn forces me basically to finish patches: if I started 
to modify something,
it is the easiest to finish it than to store it somehow away. git doesn't, just 
commit when being
disturbed, add an unfinished in front of the commit message and I can/will 
continue with something
else when I come back. For an "idle" time project like FPC this is really a 
problem for me: my
git-svn copy contains currently around 60 unfinsished branches :(

And of course in case of FPC the huge effort to switch the whole infrastructure.


That scares people. That is
why I introduced the developers, at my previous employment, to git by
simplifying things. I let them use a client/server workflow model. That
seem to have helped them a lot, and get over that fear they had.


Apologies for resurrecting a fairly old thread, but I've been doing a 
bit of digging for my own interest and want to challenge Graham on one 
or two points.


Before anything else, I think it's reasonable to assume that Git is here 
to stay, in the same way that CVS was here to stay: there might be 
something better in the future, but for now it's something that a 
developer has to know about.


As I understand it, Git is not only distributed but decentralised. That 
is, the cooperating developers maintain an undirected graph of Git 
instances, there is no single master repository: if the project owner's 
servers go down it is not possible to guarantee that the project can be 
reconstructed to an extent that would satisfy e.g. a court investigating 
intellectual property ownership, and that is going to spook corporates 
and their lawyers and should be a concern to free software advocates who 
might need to establish precedence and "prior art".


Now I am sure that Git advocates will point out some bolt-on accessory 
that turns Git into a tree. But when the Git designer (who, I grant, is 
not the current maintainer) is happy to say "You are stupid" to anybody 
who doesn't see things his way, or "You should be in some mental 
institution" to people who find that CVS fits their way of working, one 
has to wonder whether the Git community really would commit themselves 
to that sort of hybrid.


By way of comparison, Subversion has a single, master repository 
generally maintained by the project owner or his agent. If the machine 
crashes he should be able to restore from backups (tape, cloud or 
whatever) and forensic inspection of the failed disc would probably be 
able to confirm that the restored repository was a fair copy of the lost 
one.


The problem with Subversion is that it's entirely centralised. Leaving 
aside Torvalds's arguments about the performance implications ("Merging 
in subversion is a complete disaster [...] and their plan sucks too."), 
I don't think there's an officially-sanctioned way of building a tree 
(or even a star) of caching servers. There used to be something called 
SVK, but even that would only allow a single layer of local caches: 
there was no provision for a group of programmers to have networked 
connection to a departmental server which was a reliable copy of the 
project owner's system.


So it seems to me that one has to concede that Git and Subversion 
between them have pretty much swept everything else off the board, at 
least from the point of view of unpaid developers and free (money and 
beer) projects. Which is unfortunate, since for all its bluster about 
cryptographic consistency checks Git is deficient when it comes to 
guaranteeing that there is a single master copy of a project, and for 
all its accumulated good reputation Subversion is deficient when it 
comes to extending the network architecture and enforcing fine-grained 
security.


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Florian,

On 2015-03-16 19:51, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> But why do you use Pascal then?


Sadly, I'm slowly moving to Java. Go where the work is.


Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Florian Klämpfl]

Am 16.03.2015 um 10:23 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:

> "As the majority of developers would tell you, Git is simply the better
> product at this stage".
> 
> If you want facts, then do a Google search. See the exponential growth
> of projects migrating from SubVersion (or other systems) to Git. Qt,
> KDE, Linux Kernel etc - they are massive projects and must have had very
> good reason to move to Git.

But why do you use Pascal then? All these projects use C/C++, probably also for 
a good reason.
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Florian Klämpfl]

Am 16.03.2015 um 13:53 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> Hello Martin,
> 
> On 2015-03-16 12:35, Martin Frb wrote:
>> "better product", simply means: Compared to others it scores better on 
>> more use cases.
> 
> Agreed.  :-)
> 
> 
>> Different people learn in different ways. There will be a fair share of 
>> people for whom taking their first steps into using a repository is 
>> better done with a simpler system.
> 
> I fully understand that. I think the biggest resistance to migrating to
> git is the "distributed system" principle. 

For me
1) it is usability, mainly the gui, well, and other stuff like the 
un-memorizable hashes.
2) too much freedom :) svn forces me basically to finish patches: if I started 
to modify something,
it is the easiest to finish it than to store it somehow away. git doesn't, just 
commit when being
disturbed, add an unfinished in front of the commit message and I can/will 
continue with something
else when I come back. For an "idle" time project like FPC this is really a 
problem for me: my
git-svn copy contains currently around 60 unfinsished branches :(

And of course in case of FPC the huge effort to switch the whole infrastructure.

> That scares people. That is
> why I introduced the developers, at my previous employment, to git by
> simplifying things. I let them use a client/server workflow model. That
> seem to have helped them a lot, and get over that fear they had.

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 16/03/2015 14:54, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

Hello Martin,

On 2015-03-16 14:35, Martin Frb wrote:

A simple git alias can do that for you all in one command. ;-)

And in a GUI? The only GUI on windows that was to my taste, is Tortoise.

And exactly why I don't bother with 3rd party GUI frontends. They *all*
lack git features.


Well and there we are: For people who want/need/prioritize a GUI, GIT is 
(for no fault of its own) not always the best choice.


___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Martin,

On 2015-03-16 14:35, Martin Frb wrote:
>> > A simple git alias can do that for you all in one command. ;-)
> And in a GUI? The only GUI on windows that was to my taste, is Tortoise.

And exactly why I don't bother with 3rd party GUI frontends. They *all*
lack git features.

I found SmartGit (Java based but uses SWT toolkit so looks native
everywhere) tolerable for basic commits and reviewing the commit log.
But as soon as you get to things like cherry-picking, rebase, rebase
--onto, commit only specific changed lines of code from a file, SVN repo
integration etc... Then those GUI's just stumble or are more complex and
confusing than the command line. [my personal opinion obviously]


Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 16/03/2015 14:18, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

Hello Martin,

On 2015-03-16 13:17, Martin Frb wrote:

Local commits (commit, without push) can be a huge advantage.

Ah yes, but they loved the idea shortly afterwards.

As I said they *can* be a huge advantage.



   "svn up" is roughly equal to: stash, fetch and rebase (pull?), stash pop.

A simple git alias can do that for you all in one command. ;-)

And in a GUI? The only GUI on windows that was to my taste, is Tortoise.

But if there is another GUI, that can do that?
On win, ideally with explorer integration and not custom drawn (its on 
windows, its hould look (aprox) like a win app)


True it is not the fault of GIT, if there is on frontend that suits 
me But it does not help





This is, if I want to update, and just be left with any merge conflicts
in by local changes.

And that is why I trained them from the start to develop in local
feature branches, and never directly in 'master' or 'develop' (any
tracking branches). Follow that and you will never get a conflict on a
'git pull' again. In fact you don't need 'git pull' then, only 'git
fetch' will suffice. Then when you have the time, you can review the
latest changes from upstream (origin) and merge those into your local
feature branch - when it suits you.



And while all this has many advantage, it is not the point.
Yes you can avoid (or defer) the merge conflicts. Which is again a good 
feature. Unless of course you are not interested in deferring them.



___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Martin,

On 2015-03-16 13:17, Martin Frb wrote:
> Local commits (commit, without push) can be a huge advantage.

Ah yes, but they loved the idea shortly afterwards. Then weeks later
when I mentioned the rebase command to neaten up local commits before
you make it public - that was another hour of explanation and examples
on a whiteboard. :-)  Strangely they found out by themselves (to my
surprise) about the 'rebase --onto' command and now use that a lot.


>   "svn up" is roughly equal to: stash, fetch and rebase (pull?), stash pop.

A simple git alias can do that for you all in one command. ;-) I've
attached some of my most used alias commands. You might find some of
them useful. Simply copy them into your $HOME/.gitconfig file.

pull = fetch + rebase

The newer git is pretty clever and the command tips seen in the CLI
output is often very useful. I believe it can do a stash and pop
automatically for you. I also know the 'git svn fetch' automatically
does a rebase of your local commits not yet in SubVersion.


> This is, if I want to update, and just be left with any merge conflicts 
> in by local changes.

And that is why I trained them from the start to develop in local
feature branches, and never directly in 'master' or 'develop' (any
tracking branches). Follow that and you will never get a conflict on a
'git pull' again. In fact you don't need 'git pull' then, only 'git
fetch' will suffice. Then when you have the time, you can review the
latest changes from upstream (origin) and merge those into your local
feature branch - when it suits you.

Regards,
  Graeme

[alias]
# to list these alias via 'git alias'
alias = config --get-regexp ^alias\\.
one = show -s --pretty='format:%h (%s)'
l = log --pretty='format:%h %ad %s' --date=short
lg = log --graph --decorate --pretty=oneline --abbrev-commit
lga = log --graph --decorate --pretty=oneline --abbrev-commit --all
ilog = log --date=iso
llog = log --date=local
subj = show -s --pretty='format:Changes in %h (%s)'
who = !sh -c 'git log -1 --pretty=\"format:%an <%ae>\" --author=\"$1\"' -
whatis = "!f() { git show -s --pretty='format:%h (%s, %ai' \"$@\" | sed -e 
's/ [012][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]:[0-5][0-9] [-+][0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]$/)\\n/'; }; f"
#svnrev = log --pretty=format:%b -n 1 HEAD~1 | egrep '^git-svn-id:' | sed 
's:.*/\([^/]*\)@\([0-9]*\) [0-9a-f].*:r\2:'
svnlog = log --stat=70 --pretty=medium --name-status
# param1 is to address. param2 is patch file created with 'format-patch -1 
sha1'
email = !sh -c 'git send-email --to=$1 --smtp-server=192.168.0.17 
--suppress-cc=all --annotate $2' -
svnrevlog = !sh -c 'git log --grep=@$1 --pretty='format:%H' upstream' -
svnrevlog1 = !sh -c 'git log --grep=@$1 --pretty='format:%H' master' -
svnrevlog2 = !sh -c 'git rev-list --grep=\"@$1\" upstream' -
svncpick = 'git cherry-pick | git svnlog $1'
st = status -uno
apply-patch = 'git apply --ignore-whitespace $1'
# list branches sorted by last modified
changelog = 'git log master..develop | git shortlog'
st = status -uno
a = add
ap = add -p
c = commit --verbose
ca = commit -a --verbose
cm = commit -m
cam = commit -a -m
m = commit --amend --verbose
u = reset --hard
d = diff
ds = diff --stat
dc = diff --cached
s = status -s
co = checkout
cob = checkout -b
# list branches sorted by last modified
b = "!git for-each-ref --sort='-authordate' 
--format='%(authordate)%09%(objectname:short)%09%(refname)' refs/heads | sed -e 
's-refs/heads/--'"
# Create deployment package using 7zip instead, but still a ZIP archive
deploy = !sh -c 'git diff --name-only --diff-filter=ACMRT -z $1 | xargs 
-0 7z.exe a -tzip deploy_$0.zip'

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 16/03/2015 12:53, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

I fully understand that. I think the biggest resistance to migrating to
git is the "distributed system" principle. That scares people. That is
why I introduced the developers, at my previous employment, to git by
simplifying things. I let them use a client/server workflow model. That
seem to have helped them a lot, and get over that fear they had.



Actually there are other things:

Local commits (commit, without push) can be a huge advantage.
But the act that you need twice the commands to get your commit to the 
server can also be a turn off (Command line you can use a script / but 
with a GUI...).


Same for update.
 "svn up" is roughly equal to: stash, fetch and rebase (pull?), stash pop.
This is, if I want to update, and just be left with any merge conflicts 
in by local changes.
Sure Git offers me tons of choices here, and sometimes they are useful. 
But if I just want the equivalent of "svn up", then git is more work.





___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Nikolay Nikolov]

On 16.3.2015 г. 14:24, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

I can also add that SubVersion has *no* concept of Tags. To SubVersion
there is no difference between a Tag and a Branch. Why do I say that?
Simply because you can create a Tag in the repository, and then start
adding commits to it just mind boggling! :) Why did they even bother.

You can add a pre-commit hook that disallows changes to the tags directory:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/464384/svn-pre-commit-hook-for-avoiding-changes-to-tags-subdirectories

Nikolay
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Martin,

On 2015-03-16 12:35, Martin Frb wrote:
> "better product", simply means: Compared to others it scores better on 
> more use cases.

Agreed.  :-)


> Different people learn in different ways. There will be a fair share of 
> people for whom taking their first steps into using a repository is 
> better done with a simpler system.

I fully understand that. I think the biggest resistance to migrating to
git is the "distributed system" principle. That scares people. That is
why I introduced the developers, at my previous employment, to git by
simplifying things. I let them use a client/server workflow model. That
seem to have helped them a lot, and get over that fear they had.

Regards,
  Graeme


___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

Hello Mark,

On 2015-03-16 11:50, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
details perhaps they'd explain them, after all /somebody/ has to give 
Graeme something concrete on which to build his argument :-)


hehehe... Just watch Linus's Google Tech Talk on YouTube. ;-)

I can also add that SubVersion has *no* concept of Tags. To SubVersion
there is no difference between a Tag and a Branch. Why do I say that?
Simply because you can create a Tag in the repository, and then start
adding commits to it just mind boggling! :) Why did they even bother.


I agree. In any reasonable vocabulary, a tag would represent a 
particular revision number relative to a branch.


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 16/03/2015 09:23, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:


"As the majority of developers would tell you, Git is simply the better
product at this stage".


That I can live with.

There is a 2nd potential point of confusion to it.

"better product", simply means: Compared to others it scores better on 
more use cases.


It does no mean (at least not to me), that it is better for *all* (or 
very high percentage [1])  use cases.


I did myself mix that up in my previous reply.




[1]
This in not to say, it could not be a high percentage, it just says that 
the phrase does not necessarily mean this.


For example (assuming you use a provider, and do not have to set up the 
server). The learning curve for an absolute newly is higher for GIT than 
far SVN.


Different people learn in different ways. There will be a fair share of 
people for whom taking their first steps into using a repository is 
better done with a simpler system. (Just for the learning, but it still 
is a valid use case)

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Frank,


On 2015-03-16 12:08, vfclists . wrote:
> have there been any good surveys supporting that conclusion?

Yes, mine.  :-P

G.

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Mark,

On 2015-03-16 11:50, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> details perhaps they'd explain them, after all /somebody/ has to give 
> Graeme something concrete on which to build his argument :-)

hehehe... Just watch Linus's Google Tech Talk on YouTube. ;-)

I can also add that SubVersion has *no* concept of Tags. To SubVersion
there is no difference between a Tag and a Branch. Why do I say that?
Simply because you can create a Tag in the repository, and then start
adding commits to it just mind boggling! :) Why did they even bother.

Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 16/03/2015 09:02, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

Hello Martin,


On 2015-03-15 20:32, Martin Frb wrote:

But that does not change, that there are developers who store their
projects in GIT, but who do not use the features at all. For such a
developer it can be said, that even CVS has more feature, than the set
of features they use in GIT.
This is one case, where GIT was clearly not the best choice. (Assuming
they had choice)


There is no rule that says you must use all feature of Git, otherwise it
is waisted or not the best choice.

Again: Not what I wrote.

In fact I wrote: I (myself, as an example) am using GIT, yet I am sure 
that it still has much for me to discover.
But just because in my case that is still making at a good choice (in 
specific cases, the best within the range of choices I know), does not 
mean that this is the same in every case.



As for what you wrote.

Yes there is no such rule.
But the absence of such a rule, does *not* mean the absence of such cases.

Not every case where GIT is not fully used, is a waste. But such case do 
exist none the less.



___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[vfclists .]

On 16 March 2015 at 11:50, Mark Morgan Lloyd <
markmll.fpc-ot...@telemetry.co.uk> wrote:

> Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
>
>  If you want facts, then do a Google search. See the exponential growth
>> of projects migrating from SubVersion (or other systems) to Git. Qt,
>> KDE, Linux Kernel etc - they are massive projects and must have had very
>> good reason to move to Git.
>>
>
>
I think Graeme's statement should be "99% of developers who have good
working experience with BOTH consider Git to be better", but there have
there been any good surveys supporting that conclusion?


-- 
Frank Church

===
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:


If you want facts, then do a Google search. See the exponential growth
of projects migrating from SubVersion (or other systems) to Git. Qt,
KDE, Linux Kernel etc - they are massive projects and must have had very
good reason to move to Git.


The Linux developers moved because they were thrown off Bitkeeper after 
being accused of reverse-engineering it.


I'm aware of the fact that there's something about managing directories 
(or possibly branches/tags) in Subversion that's considered broken, and 
I believe that when Torvalds hurriedly designed Git he took pains to fix 
that particular flaw. If one of the FPC maintainers can remember the 
details perhaps they'd explain them, after all /somebody/ has to give 
Graeme something concrete on which to build his argument :-)


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Marco van de Voort wrote:

In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
A better metric might be finding somebody who offers a selection of VCS 
protocols (possibly with a common backend- I believe such things exist?) 
and then looking at the relative use for checkouts etc.

You can start by looking at the following Wikipedia page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_source_code_software_hosting_facilities

See the "Popularity" section. GitHub sits and 19.8mil projects.


If you look on the github referenced page, its repositories, not projects.
The translation to projects is wikipedias own.

The fact that github+gitlab  projects >people and by others the other way
around should ring a bell.

I get the feeling these stats are meaningless because github has a large 
excess of personal repositories that skews stats, while sf was more

collaboration oriented.


Also it's still based on what's being offered, not on what users would 
adopt if it were available.


Now it might be that git is inherently more secure than svn etc.- I 
don't mean more resilient when it comes to rolling back mischief, I mean 
*SECURE* as in "there's no buffer overflows or certificate weaknesses". 
Obviously that sort of thing would make it more attractive from the POV 
of somebody building a business around it, but so far I see nobody 
arguing that point and fewer people providing uncontestable evidence :-)


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Marco van de Voort]

In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said:
> > A better metric might be finding somebody who offers a selection of VCS 
> > protocols (possibly with a common backend- I believe such things exist?) 
> > and then looking at the relative use for checkouts etc.
> 
> You can start by looking at the following Wikipedia page
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_source_code_software_hosting_facilities
> 
> See the "Popularity" section. GitHub sits and 19.8mil projects.

If you look on the github referenced page, its repositories, not projects.
The translation to projects is wikipedias own.

The fact that github+gitlab  projects >people and by others the other way
around should ring a bell.

I get the feeling these stats are meaningless because github has a large 
excess of personal repositories that skews stats, while sf was more
collaboration oriented.

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Nikolay Nikolov]

On 03/16/2015 11:34 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:


But again, use whatever fits you best. I did deep evaluations of many
systems, then made my choice. So far, I'm very happy with my choice and
outcome.

Yes, we *know*. You have made us well aware of this fact. :)

Nikolay
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Nikolay Nikolov]

On 03/16/2015 11:02 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:


What I like about it is that it is extremely quick to get a repo started
(unlike say SubVersion, Team Coherence, Perforce, SourceSafe etc). No
service/daemon required, no remote server needed. Just a directory where
you can run 'git init' and you are set to go.
I don't know why do you keep saying that. Do you know you can do the 
same thing with svn? It's a single command - "svnadmin create" followed 
by a directory name. You don't need any daemons and remote servers - you 
can immediately checkout from this local directory.


Nikolay
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Mark,


On 2015-03-16 10:09, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
> A better metric might be finding somebody who offers a selection of VCS 
> protocols (possibly with a common backend- I believe such things exist?) 
> and then looking at the relative use for checkouts etc.

You can start by looking at the following Wikipedia page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_source_code_software_hosting_facilities

See the "Popularity" section. GitHub sits and 19.8mil projects. Second
place is SourceForge at a mere 324k. Stats are published numbers
directly from each service provider. That is quite impressive, I never
realised GitHub was that big - I somehow thought SourceForge would be
tops. I also didn't realise Google Code being so popular (250k projects).


Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:


If you want facts, then do a Google search. See the exponential growth
of projects migrating from SubVersion (or other systems) to Git. Qt,
KDE, Linux Kernel etc - they are massive projects and must have had very
good reason to move to Git.

Also observe the amount of new code storage services popping up - most
based around Git repositories. I personally have not observed recent
code repository services appearing on the internet boasting (or even
supporting) SubVersion. Surely that has to mean something.


What it means is that more hosting services find it convenient to offer 
Git than find it convenient to offer Subversion, you've already claimed 
that it's easier to administer. In other words, the end-user who's just 
looking for somewhere to store his code simply doesn't get a choice.


A better metric might be finding somebody who offers a selection of VCS 
protocols (possibly with a common backend- I believe such things exist?) 
and then looking at the relative use for checkouts etc.


However as I've said already, the most important concern for me is not 
the protocol so much as the jurisdiction.


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Luca,

On 2015-03-15 14:46, Luca Olivetti wrote:
> but the
> same can be said about mercurial. I still cannot wrap my head around
> git, though I had no difficulty picking up mercurial (at least for basic
> functionality).

Agreed, Git and Mercurial are very similar (at some point). I haven't
found or observed any real difficulty in familiarising oneself with
either product. I can say what I don't like about Mercurial. It is a
plugin based system (at least that is how it was when I last looked at
it - I stopped following Mercurial development). So after you installed
the base, then you need to start adding in the plugins to get real
features. Your plugins might not be the same as somebody else's - so you
can't trade solutions (commands) easily between developers like you can
with Git. Git was just an easier setup for me. I also don't like the
incremental version numbering of Mercurial - especially considering that
it is a distributed system, so such version numbers really have NO
meaning in a distributed system. For the long term prospects, Git just
seems to have more momentum.

But again, use whatever fits you best. I did deep evaluations of many
systems, then made my choice. So far, I'm very happy with my choice and
outcome.

Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Martin,

On 2015-03-15 20:49, Martin Frb wrote:
> I did judge your statement on it, that
>> /As 99% of developers would tell you, Git is simply// the better product./

My apologies if there has been some confusion. Probably down to a
language barrier issue.

In the context the usage of "99%" wasn't meant a specific number. It's
like saying "there are a 101 ways to skin a cat". You are not
specifically saying there is only a 101 ways (not 100, not 102). You
also don't actually want to remove the skin off a cat. :) [what a
terrible saying - I love cats] It is a generalised statement meaning "a
lot" or "the majority" agree there are many ways to accomplish something.

So to rephrase my quoted statement I could have said

"As the majority of developers would tell you, Git is simply the better
product at this stage".

If you want facts, then do a Google search. See the exponential growth
of projects migrating from SubVersion (or other systems) to Git. Qt,
KDE, Linux Kernel etc - they are massive projects and must have had very
good reason to move to Git.

Also observe the amount of new code storage services popping up - most
based around Git repositories. I personally have not observed recent
code repository services appearing on the internet boasting (or even
supporting) SubVersion. Surely that has to mean something.

Obviously you as a developer or company have to make your own choice -
evaluate the pros and cons of each code management system. How difficult
it would be to migrate and see what solution would benefit you in the
short and long term.

Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Martin,


On 2015-03-15 20:32, Martin Frb wrote:
> But that does not change, that there are developers who store their
> projects in GIT, but who do not use the features at all. For such a
> developer it can be said, that even CVS has more feature, than the set
> of features they use in GIT.
> This is one case, where GIT was clearly not the best choice. (Assuming
> they had choice)


There is no rule that says you must use all feature of Git, otherwise it
is waisted or not the best choice. Like I tell everybody else. To get
started with Git you need to know about 4-6 commands (just like svn) and
that will allow you to do most day-to-day development work with it.
Perfect, and nothing wrong with that. You now have a reliable and stable
source code management system will a full backup of all your project
changes. What workflow you use is irrelevant.

Then as time goes by and your confidence with Git grows, then start
experimenting with other commands and features. Learn and use git at
your own place.

What I like about it is that it is extremely quick to get a repo started
(unlike say SubVersion, Team Coherence, Perforce, SourceSafe etc). No
service/daemon required, no remote server needed. Just a directory where
you can run 'git init' and you are set to go.

Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Paul Breneman]

On 03/15/2015 08:21 AM, Florian Klämpfl wrote:

Am 15.03.2015 um 13:06 schrieb Paul Breneman:

On 03/15/2015 05:44 AM, Florian Klämpfl wrote:

Am 15.03.2015 um 11:10 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:

NOBODY I
know has ever considered going back to SubVersion after using Git.


Good to know that upper case NOBODY includes me :)


Here is a simple introduction to git (as well as Linux, Python, Vim):


I know git and I can use it but I cannot get used to it. Besides a lot of other 
things which annoy
me, it still misses good gui tools for me, especially on non-windows. 
TortoiseGit on Windows is ok,
but something like CommitMonitor which I use for fast code reviewing is afaik 
not avaiblable for
git. And yes, I am a gui guy and I refuse to type lengthy command line message 
which I've always to
look up in some self made cheat sheet or in the man pages.


   http://levinux.com


Bad for them that I am not enabling JavaScript (or whatever) for some random 
site :)


Sorry, I'll try to put both links together next time:
  http://mikelev.in/ux/

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 15/03/2015 20:32, Martin Frb wrote:



I'm not talking about just installing it and not
doing anything with it - that's NOT using a product, so you can't review
it based on that.


I forget that in my reply:

That is what some people do (and what I pointed out): install, but not 
really use.


I did *not* judge GIT on that.

I did judge your statement on it, that

/As 99% of developers would tell you, Git is simply//  the better product./


1) How would those none users even judge that, what value would there 
statement have.

2) Should they  really be told that GIT was best for them?

If they do not want/care to use all the features. If for example all 
they want is an online backup, with access to all previous backups 
(revisions): Should I tell them GIT is the best product for that task?


I am willing to believe that 99% of the developers you know / you have 
asked say that (and even that, when they said it, it was correct in the 
situation.)
But "the developers you know / you have asked" are not a random selected 
group, they are not representative of *all* developers.


If you state the above, without clarification of what group of 
developers, in oher word, if you refer to *all* developers then I disagree.


So I am convinced that:
- either a lesser percentage does say so
- they are giving bad advice (telling someone to use git, who would be 
better off without)



___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

Reading the replies I can clearly see that neither of you have ever used
Git for actual work.
I have, and I do. That said, only for maybe 6 to 9 month by now, and in 
that time I might well only have scratched the surface of it, and yet 
much to discover.


But never mind how well I know it, that was never the point. I did at 
*no* time say that git was not good, or could not be useful.


I said that, it is not always the best choice, for that: read on below:


I'm not talking about just installing it and not
doing anything with it - that's NOT using a product, so you can't review
it based on that.

>>/  Look around. I have seen many git repositories (svn probably too), where
/>>/  the (sole) committer uses git in a way, that cvs would allow to do more.
/>>/  How is git better for them?
/
Your statement is so ridiculous I had to laugh out loud. Git is
magnitudes better that CVS and SubVersion combined. And yes it is
extremely useful even for a sole developer.
That has nothing to do with what I wrote. And I never said that this was 
not the case. Yes it *can* be very useful for  a single developer.


But that does not change, that there are developers who store their 
projects in GIT, but who do not use the features at all. For such a 
developer it can be said, that even CVS has more feature, than the set 
of features they use in GIT.
This is one case, where GIT was clearly not the best choice. (Assuming 
they had choice)


It is not about what GIT can do, but what a developer makes out of it. 
And also what a developer actually wants or needs.



then please stop spreading FUD

Read what I wrote, before falsely accusing me of spreading FUD.


if you actually tried git, you would soon realise it is a vital tool

I tried it, not only did I try it, I use it for some projects.
I still stand by the statement that I made.

I regard Git just as important as a good
programmer editor or IDE. Yes, that important!


I agree, yet there are many IDEs, and for different tasks different IDE 
are better suited






___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Luca Olivetti]

El 15/03/15 a les 11:10, Graeme Geldenhuys ha escrit:
> Hello Mark Morgan,
> 
> I wasn't going to reply because I've had enough fruitless debates in
> these mailing lists. But here I go again - I just can't help myself -
> especially if I see false statement being thrown around as if they are fact.

[snipped lengthy part about git features]

> Again, a clear indication that you have NEVER used Git before. Git is
> infinitely faster and easier to setup.
> 
> Start a new Git repository for an existing code base
> 
> $ cd /path/to/my/codebase
> $ git init  (1)
> $ git add . (2)
> $ git commit(3)
> 
>   1. Create a /path/to/my/codebase/.git directory.
>   2. Add all existing files to the index.
>   3. Record the pristine state as the first commit in the history.
> 
> Congratulations, you have a fully working and 100% setup Git repository!
> No server required, no "parasite service/daemon" required etc.


I don't dispute that, I even tentatively migrated my googlecode projects
to github (though I might reconsider and use bitbucket instead), but the
same can be said about mercurial. I still cannot wrap my head around
git, though I had no difficulty picking up mercurial (at least for basic
functionality).
I don't really see the advantages of using git instead of mercurial
(other than going with the flow, but then I would stop using pascal if
that was my main motivation).

Bye
-- 
Luca

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

Reading the replies I can clearly see that neither of you have ever used
Git for actual work.
I have, and I do. That said, only for maybe 6 to 9 month by now, and in 
that time I might well only have scratched the surface of it, and yet 
much to discover.


But never mind how well I know it, that was never the point. I did at 
*no* time say that git was not good, or could not be useful.


I said that, it is not always the best choice, for that: read on below:


I'm not talking about just installing it and not
doing anything with it - that's NOT using a product, so you can't review
it based on that.

>>/  Look around. I have seen many git repositories (svn probably too), where
/>>/  the (sole) committer uses git in a way, that cvs would allow to do more.
/>>/  How is git better for them?
/
Your statement is so ridiculous I had to laugh out loud. Git is
magnitudes better that CVS and SubVersion combined. And yes it is
extremely useful even for a sole developer.
That has nothing to do with what I wrote. And I never said that this was 
not the case. Yes it *can* be very useful for  a single developer.


But that does not change, that there are developers who store their 
projects in GIT, but who do not use the features at all. For such a 
developer it can be said, that even CVS has more feature, than the set 
of features they use in GIT.
This is one case, where GIT was clearly not the best choice. (Assuming 
they had choice)


It is not about what GIT can do, but what a developer makes out of it. 
And also what a developer actually wants or needs.



then please stop spreading FUD

Read what I wrote, before falsely accusing me of spreading FUD.


if you actually tried git, you would soon realise it is a vital tool

I tried it, not only did I try it, I use it for some projects.
I still stand by the statement that I made.

I regard Git just as important as a good
programmer editor or IDE. Yes, that important!


I agree, yet there are many IDEs, and for different tasks different IDE 
are better suited






___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[vfclists .]

On 15 March 2015 at 16:13, Sven Barth  wrote:

> On 15.03.2015 15:11, vfclists . wrote:
>
>> I think the main FPC developers need to realize that sooner or later
>> they are allow going to retire from FPC development and move onto other
>> things, or just retire form working life,  or finally to the great happy
>> retirement home in the sky, and a new generation will have to take over
>> FPC development. They have to plan and workout a succession, and that
>> succession will have to involve a new generation of programmers who
>> learned different ways of working,  and that more or less involves Git
>> and a whole lot of other tools.
>>
>> Somehow all this indifference to Git bothers me because it seems they
>> are ignoring the greater realities of life. If a new generation are
>> going to get involved with FPC and Lazarus development, and the main
>> developers are really concerned with all the time and effort they put
>> into this great product not going to waste when they retire then they
>> ought to reconsider the indifference or aversion to Git. This is what
>> the aversion or indifference to Git signifies me. It doesn't mean that I
>> don't think they don't have any plans for how the project will be
>> continued in the long term future, but there seems to an indifference in
>> the appeal the working culture has for newer generation. They need
>> foster a passion and a commitment (fanboy fanaticism may be the right
>> word) to Lazarus and FPC in a new generation.
>>
>
> Users that want to be developers for FPC should first and foremost love
> the language. What backend we use to manage the code should not be
> important then. There are even successful projects out there that still use
> CVS, so don't come with "if it's not Git then no one will come".
>
> Regards,
> Sven
>
>
My reply is not so much about Git being superior to SVN, its more about how
to broaden the appeal of Lazarus and FreePascal to a new generation who
will carry it forward into the future. I know that FreePascal developers
are grizzled veterans who have seen lots of new fads come and go, but how
do you draw in a new generation of users to a good product, when there are
so many competing (and mostly inferior) alternatives around?

The 'real men use the DOS/Git command line', 'real men use SVN', 'real men
don't drink Diet Coke', 'real men use Emacs' image doesn't help. It is more
about image rather than substance.

I am not saying that switching from Git to SVN will popularize FreePascal
and Lazarus, but choice of version control aside, what can broaden the
appeal of FreePascal and Lazarus to a new generation. It probably warrants
a different thread.

I know this isn't the style of FreePascal and Lazarus's developers who are
a group of dedicated volunteers, but Pascal is still quite popular in
Europe, and it may be time to seek some funds from some European funding
agency and give FreePascal and  Lazarus developers, together with  the
whole Pascal ecosystem the major push it definitely deserves.

-- 
Frank Church

===
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Sven Barth]

On 15.03.2015 15:11, vfclists . wrote:

I think the main FPC developers need to realize that sooner or later
they are allow going to retire from FPC development and move onto other
things, or just retire form working life,  or finally to the great happy
retirement home in the sky, and a new generation will have to take over
FPC development. They have to plan and workout a succession, and that
succession will have to involve a new generation of programmers who
learned different ways of working,  and that more or less involves Git
and a whole lot of other tools.

Somehow all this indifference to Git bothers me because it seems they
are ignoring the greater realities of life. If a new generation are
going to get involved with FPC and Lazarus development, and the main
developers are really concerned with all the time and effort they put
into this great product not going to waste when they retire then they
ought to reconsider the indifference or aversion to Git. This is what
the aversion or indifference to Git signifies me. It doesn't mean that I
don't think they don't have any plans for how the project will be
continued in the long term future, but there seems to an indifference in
the appeal the working culture has for newer generation. They need
foster a passion and a commitment (fanboy fanaticism may be the right
word) to Lazarus and FPC in a new generation.


Users that want to be developers for FPC should first and foremost love 
the language. What backend we use to manage the code should not be 
important then. There are even successful projects out there that still 
use CVS, so don't come with "if it's not Git then no one will come".


Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Florian,

On 2015-03-15 14:40, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> with git-svn

'git svn' is super useful - I use it often. It is merely a stop-gap
though. It limits a git repo (features) a lot. But like I said, it is
still useful.

Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hi,

On 2015-03-15 14:11, vfclists . wrote:
> I think such a tool with documentation on how it was built would be the
> best advert for Lazarus and FreePascal. Graeme?

I've tried ever GUI tool under the sun for Git. They all have there
faults. In most cases they often get confused about the actual state of
the repo, are slow as hell, or simply lag behind the actual Git cli tool.

Also having to learn different GUI tools on each platform I use is damn
annoying too.

So with all the above taken into account, that is why I prefer to do all
my git work from the command line. I must confess I use 'git gui' and
'gitk' very often too. Ignore the fact that those Tcl/Tk apps will not
win any beauty contest, but they sure as hell are very efficient,
functional and consistent across all platforms that Git supports. In
fact they have many hidden command line parameters too, which change
their functionality, making them more useful. Other GUI front-ends just
can't keep up with Git's development pace. So now I only have one set of
tools to learn and can happily jump between platforms and not miss a
beat. The standard Git under Windows even have shell integration for
those die-hard GUI fans.

So no, I don't condone yet another feature limiting Git frontend - we
already have way to many out there for my liking.

Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Paul,

On 2015-03-15 12:06, Paul Breneman wrote:
> Here is a simple introduction to git (as well as Linux, Python, Vim):
>http://levinux.com


Brilliant idea using a single web page as a slideshow. :)


Regards,
  Graeme
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Marco van de Voort]

In our previous episode, vfclists . said:
 
> Now Florian, considering your preference for GUI tools, won't the
> development of cross platform Git GUI surpassing Tortoise Git, Github and
> Atlassian's tools, SmartGit and whatever be the best advert for Lazarus and
> FPC? There would such a major flow of patches coming in that you would have
> to stop coding actively and review the patches going in like Linus does.

Yeah, and I have interesting property on the moon to sell. I've a feeling
you are the perfect guy for it :-)

Arguments on "change your infrastructure like this and the hordes will come"
are considered with very big scepticism. Call it Voort's law if you will.

Since somehow those hordes never materialize.
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Florian Klaempfl]

Am 15.03.2015 um 15:40 schrieb Florian Klämpfl:
> Am 15.03.2015 um 15:11 schrieb vfclists .:
>> Somehow all this indifference to Git bothers me because it seems they are 
>> ignoring the greater
>> realities of life. If a new generation are going to get involved with FPC 
>> and Lazarus development,
>> and the main developers are really concerned with all the time and effort 
>> they put into this great
>> product not going to waste when they retire then they ought to reconsider 
>> the indifference or
>> aversion to Git. 
> 
> Luckily enough, this is an automatism. As soon as somebody pops up and does 
> e.g. repository
> maintainance, fixes branch merging etc. and volounteers to work on switching 
> the whole FPC
> infrastructure to git, this will happen. Since this is a lot of really 
> tedious work, it will be
> probably take another couple of decades especially as anybody really used to 
> git can use it already
> flawlessly with git-svn. Ever wondered how Jonas can commit hundreds of 
> changesets within a few
> minutes ;)?

... not to mention that I am using also git-svn sometimes as a "patch
manager" for FPC development (drawback: around 60 private branches with
some nice stuff, wouldn't happen with svn ;)). Nevertheless I see no
point in using git as FPC's main repository so far.
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Florian Klämpfl]

Am 15.03.2015 um 15:11 schrieb vfclists .:
> Somehow all this indifference to Git bothers me because it seems they are 
> ignoring the greater
> realities of life. If a new generation are going to get involved with FPC and 
> Lazarus development,
> and the main developers are really concerned with all the time and effort 
> they put into this great
> product not going to waste when they retire then they ought to reconsider the 
> indifference or
> aversion to Git. 

Luckily enough, this is an automatism. As soon as somebody pops up and does 
e.g. repository
maintainance, fixes branch merging etc. and volounteers to work on switching 
the whole FPC
infrastructure to git, this will happen. Since this is a lot of really tedious 
work, it will be
probably take another couple of decades especially as anybody really used to 
git can use it already
flawlessly with git-svn. Ever wondered how Jonas can commit hundreds of 
changesets within a few
minutes ;)?

> 
> Now Florian, considering your preference for GUI tools, won't the development 
> of cross platform Git
> GUI surpassing Tortoise Git, Github and Atlassian's tools, SmartGit and 
> whatever be the best advert
> for Lazarus and FPC? 

In a world with unlimited resources and time? Maybe.

> There would such a major flow of patches coming in that you would have to stop
> coding actively and review the patches going in like Linus does.

For sure not my aim, actually, if I had only to review patches, I would quit to 
work on FPC or whatever.
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[vfclists .]

On 15 March 2015 at 13:21, Florian Klämpfl  wrote:

> Am 15.03.2015 um 13:06 schrieb Paul Breneman:
> > On 03/15/2015 05:44 AM, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
> >> Am 15.03.2015 um 11:10 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> >>> NOBODY I
> >>> know has ever considered going back to SubVersion after using Git.
> >>
> >> Good to know that upper case NOBODY includes me :)
> >
> > Here is a simple introduction to git (as well as Linux, Python, Vim):
>
> I know git and I can use it but I cannot get used to it. Besides a lot of
> other things which annoy
> me, it still misses good gui tools for me, especially on non-windows.
> TortoiseGit on Windows is ok,
> but something like CommitMonitor which I use for fast code reviewing is
> afaik not avaiblable for
> git. And yes, I am a gui guy and I refuse to type lengthy command line
> message which I've always to
> look up in some self made cheat sheet or in the man pages.
>
> >   http://levinux.com
>
> Bad for them that I am not enabling JavaScript (or whatever) for some
> random site :)
> ___
> fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other
>

I think the main FPC developers need to realize that sooner or later they
are allow going to retire from FPC development and move onto other things,
or just retire form working life,  or finally to the great happy retirement
home in the sky, and a new generation will have to take over FPC
development. They have to plan and workout a succession, and that
succession will have to involve a new generation of programmers who learned
different ways of working,  and that more or less involves Git and a whole
lot of other tools.

Somehow all this indifference to Git bothers me because it seems they are
ignoring the greater realities of life. If a new generation are going to
get involved with FPC and Lazarus development, and the main developers are
really concerned with all the time and effort they put into this great
product not going to waste when they retire then they ought to reconsider
the indifference or aversion to Git. This is what the aversion or
indifference to Git signifies me. It doesn't mean that I don't think they
don't have any plans for how the project will be continued in the long term
future, but there seems to an indifference in the appeal the working
culture has for newer generation. They need foster a passion and a
commitment (fanboy fanaticism may be the right word) to Lazarus and FPC in
a new generation.

If you think I am such a Git fanboy I am not. For personal projects I am
beginning to find Git rather cumbersone as it doesn't have project
management, ticketing, patch reviewal and a host of other stuff built in. I
am beginning to consider Fossil, yes, the same Fossil that is being mocked
in this thread as an alternative because it comes with batteries included.

Now Florian, considering your preference for GUI tools, won't the
development of cross platform Git GUI surpassing Tortoise Git, Github and
Atlassian's tools, SmartGit and whatever be the best advert for Lazarus and
FPC? There would such a major flow of patches coming in that you would have
to stop coding actively and review the patches going in like Linus does.
You could have your cake and eat it too. :). I think such a tool with
documentation on how it was built would be the best advert for Lazarus and
FreePascal. Graeme?


-- 
Frank Church

===
http://devblog.brahmancreations.com
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Florian Klämpfl]

Am 15.03.2015 um 13:06 schrieb Paul Breneman:
> On 03/15/2015 05:44 AM, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>> Am 15.03.2015 um 11:10 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
>>> NOBODY I
>>> know has ever considered going back to SubVersion after using Git.
>>
>> Good to know that upper case NOBODY includes me :)
> 
> Here is a simple introduction to git (as well as Linux, Python, Vim):

I know git and I can use it but I cannot get used to it. Besides a lot of other 
things which annoy
me, it still misses good gui tools for me, especially on non-windows. 
TortoiseGit on Windows is ok,
but something like CommitMonitor which I use for fast code reviewing is afaik 
not avaiblable for
git. And yes, I am a gui guy and I refuse to type lengthy command line message 
which I've always to
look up in some self made cheat sheet or in the man pages.

>   http://levinux.com

Bad for them that I am not enabling JavaScript (or whatever) for some random 
site :)
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Paul Breneman]

On 03/15/2015 05:44 AM, Florian Klämpfl wrote:

Am 15.03.2015 um 11:10 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:

NOBODY I
know has ever considered going back to SubVersion after using Git.


Good to know that upper case NOBODY includes me :)


Here is a simple introduction to git (as well as Linux, Python, Vim):
  http://levinux.com

I'd like to do something similar for FPC & Lazarus (as mentioned before 
in these forums).


It is sad to see the tone of these Git vs SubVersion messages...

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

Hello Mark Morgan,


If you /don't/ mind, the name is Mark Morgan Lloyd. The original Morgan 
Lloyd (strictly, Morgan Llwyd) was a churchman of considerable renown, 
and at some point my family adopted his name which persists to the 
current generation.


As far as the Git advocacy goes: frankly, old chap, I don't give a damn. 
My major criterion is the jurisdiction and laws (and de-facto 
regulations and conventions) under which a service operates, I'd prefer 
to use Subversion since that's what I'm marginally familiar with, but 
I've got nothing in particular against Git except that if you're typical 
of its users then perhaps I ought to have.



Losing Google Code is unfortunate, particularly after losing Berlios.


Yes, we agree on something. Gitorious will be lost soon too. It is sad
seeing these services disappear and taking lots of open source software
with them.


Thanks for the heads-up.

The obvious alternative for a small project would be to run an svn 
server as a parasite on a router: something like svnserve (possibly with


Again, a clear indication that you have NEVER used Git before. Git is
infinitely faster and easier to setup.


You are very close there to quoting me out of context, which is 
something that I'm not prepared to tolerate. I agree that in-context, I 
could probably better have written


"The obvious alternative for a small project would be to run an svn (or 
git etc.) server as a parasite on a router: something like svnserve (or 
equivalent, possibly with an SSH wrapper) is pretty small. There's 
obviously the risk that the server will be lost, but if collaborative 
users are persuaded to pull and republish the entire repository (svnsync 
or whatever) that can be mitigated."


HOWEVER, the thing that I was trying to emphasise was the next 
paragraph, where I warned that from recent experience exposing SSH will 
result in undesired traffic, and even if Subversion (or Git, or anything 
else) has as good implicit security as SSH if it's considered to offer a 
potential entry point for hackers then /it/ /will/ be attacked.


If there are constant hacker attacks it will inflate the amount of data 
that passes through the routers (DSL, leased line or whatever) even if 
it's rejected by the firewalls, and this might attract ISP charges which 
are obviously highly undesirable. This could possibly be avoided by 
using an unfamiliar port, but at best this is "security by obscurity" 
and it has the disadvantage that published data probably won't be 
noticed by people like archive.org or Google.


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Florian Klämpfl]

Am 15.03.2015 um 11:10 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys:
> NOBODY I
> know has ever considered going back to SubVersion after using Git. 

Good to know that upper case NOBODY includes me :)

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Hello Mark Morgan,

I wasn't going to reply because I've had enough fruitless debates in
these mailing lists. But here I go again - I just can't help myself -
especially if I see false statement being thrown around as if they are fact.

Reading the replies I can clearly see that neither of you have ever used
Git for actual work. I'm not talking about just installing it and not
doing anything with it - that's NOT using a product, so you can't review
it based on that.

>> Look around. I have seen many git repositories (svn probably too), where 
>> the (sole) committer uses git in a way, that cvs would allow to do more. 
>> How is git better for them?

Your statement is so ridiculous I had to laugh out loud. Git is
magnitudes better that CVS and SubVersion combined. And yes it is
extremely useful even for a sole developer. I even use git (because it
is so damn quick and cheap to start a repo - see below) while writing
throw-away code, or fixing sample code for support reasons. Local
branches to jump onto various tasks - another WOW.

If you haven't actually used git, then please stop spreading FUD. You
are not helping anybody.

>> Also one should make such decisions based on what is needed. Not what 
>> others do.

if you actually tried git, you would soon realise it is a vital tool in
the developers toolbox. I regard Git just as important as a good
programmer editor or IDE. Yes, that important!


> A practical problem with Git, as I've said already, is that it's got 
> much less proven portability.

What the f**k does that mean? Git not portable? Under what rock have you
been living for the last 6 years?? Git has been ported to Linux,
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris, OS/2, Windows, Haiku, AIX, Mac OSX and gods
knows what else. There is even a fully functional and up-to-date Java
implementation (used by Eclipse developers) of Git. How the hell is all
that not portable?

The Git you are talking about is from around 2006/7 - a lifetime ago if
you see how fast git is being developed.

I use Git equal amounts under Linux, FreeBSD and Windows in my daily
work. I see absolutely NO difference in usage and performance.


> Losing Google Code is unfortunate, particularly after losing Berlios.

Yes, we agree on something. Gitorious will be lost soon too. It is sad
seeing these services disappear and taking lots of open source software
with them.

But another huge plus point of Git. If just one person cloned any of
those public Git repos, they can fully recreate such a repo on another
service because Git always has the full repository history. With CVS,
SubVersion you loose a lot of information because you only have the last
single commit you checked out.

> The obvious alternative for a small project would be to run an svn 
> server as a parasite on a router: something like svnserve (possibly with

Again, a clear indication that you have NEVER used Git before. Git is
infinitely faster and easier to setup.

Start a new Git repository for an existing code base

$ cd /path/to/my/codebase
$ git init  (1)
$ git add . (2)
$ git commit(3)

  1. Create a /path/to/my/codebase/.git directory.
  2. Add all existing files to the index.
  3. Record the pristine state as the first commit in the history.

Congratulations, you have a fully working and 100% setup Git repository!
No server required, no "parasite service/daemon" required etc.

I have helped numerous individuals and companies switch from SubVersion
to Git. To be honest, all of them were sceptical about the move, but all
heard so many good things about Git. I can also say that not a single
one of them were disappointed afterwards. After a week of initial
getting used to a distributed system, they all really appreciated the
performance, features and flexibility of what Git has to offer. NOBODY I
know has ever considered going back to SubVersion after using Git. That
has to speak volumes.

Regards,
  Graeme

___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Mark Morgan Lloyd]

Martin Frb wrote:

On 14/03/2015 11:45, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

On 2015-03-14 11:38, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

[Sigh] I feel like I'm being pushed onto git rather than Subversion.

Then don't resist it. As 99% of developers would tell you, Git is simply
the better product. [Graeme runs and hides :-P]



If more features equals better ...

Moth fly into the light, not because it is better, but because it is shiny.


Moths fly into flame,
not because it is better,
but because it shines.


And a sledge hammer is not the best tool to drive a nail into your wall.


That one's more difficult, since it lacks allusion to a season :-)

Look around. I have seen many git repositories (svn probably too), where 
the (sole) committer uses git in a way, that cvs would allow to do more. 
How is git better for them?


This may still leave git the better choice for many (maybe even a 
majority). But 99% ?


Also one should make such decisions based on what is needed. Not what 
others do.


A practical problem with Git, as I've said already, is that it's got 
much less proven portability. Also since it was originally written for 
Linux developers, there might be an irrational revulsion on the part of 
closed-source programmers and administrators. Sorry Tony, but those also 
apply to Fossil.


The bottom line, however, is that when one is looking for a public (and 
preferably free) hosting service one is constrained to looking at what's 
available, which in practice means Subversion and Git- even if they're 
overkill in many cases.


Losing Google Code is unfortunate, particularly after losing Berlios.

The obvious alternative for a small project would be to run an svn 
server as a parasite on a router: something like svnserve (possibly with 
an SSH wrapper) is pretty small. There's obviously the risk that the 
server will be lost, but if collaborative users are persuaded to pull 
and republish the entire repository (svnsync or whatever) that can be 
mitigated.


The downside of that is the number of "script kiddies" out there who are 
quick to try to abuse anything that looks like a login port. A few 
months ago I put an SSH login on a number of outward-facing servers, and 
within a few hours our Internet traffic had gone up substantially: there 
were no successful penetrations, just a constant drone of attempts which 
in aggregate came close to exceeding our office-hours quota.


--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other

Re: [fpc-other] [fpc-pascal] Google Code closing down

[Martin Frb]

On 14/03/2015 11:45, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

On 2015-03-14 11:38, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

[Sigh] I feel like I'm being pushed onto git rather than Subversion.

Then don't resist it. As 99% of developers would tell you, Git is simply
the better product. [Graeme runs and hides :-P]



If more features equals better ...

Moth fly into the light, not because it is better, but because it is shiny.
And a sledge hammer is not the best tool to drive a nail into your wall.

Look around. I have seen many git repositories (svn probably too), where 
the (sole) committer uses git in a way, that cvs would allow to do more. 
How is git better for them?


This may still leave git the better choice for many (maybe even a 
majority). But 99% ?


Also one should make such decisions based on what is needed. Not what 
others do.





___
fpc-other maillist  -  fpc-other@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-other