Re: But there is Fossil...
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 12:26:49PM +, Roderick wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2020, Sean Kamath wrote: > > > Having said that, I use whatever repo projects provide. I’m not here to > > say VCS “A” is better than VCS “B”, just saying installing various > > VCS’s under OpenBSD is pretty damn simple. > > It seems to be like the wars perl vs python, emacs vs vi, etc. > > But no, there are differences: it is groupware, about workflow. > The appropriate VCS may depend on the way people works, see > for example: > > https://www.fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki There's a lot of fluff in there which doesn't apply to Got in any way. It used to be patches vs. CVS, then SVN vs. X, and these days it is usually Git vs. X. The actual reasons why people start writing VCS tools and make certain design choices rarely show up in high-level comparisons written with the benefit of hindsight. It is important to note that Got is not Git and while I took inspiration from several other VCS systems I don't see any reason to write up detailed comparisons between Got and any other systems. Taking over users from other systems is not a goal. Those users already have the tools they need. I am writing this tool so I can use it to hack on OpenBSD for which I have already used and considered many VCS over years, including fossil: $ ls -l *.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 368K Jan 31 2017 athn.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 180K Jan 17 2014 avr32.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 912K Dec 25 2017 bgscan.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 348K Jul 18 2014 bwi.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 86.0K Jul 31 2014 dolphin.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 1005K Feb 7 2015 iwm.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 908K Jun 4 2016 iwm8k.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 736K Nov 12 2016 mira.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 117K Aug 27 2013 omedma.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 100K Oct 21 2013 omsdma.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 97.0K Dec 16 2013 rsu.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 228K May 18 2014 run.fossil -rw-r--r-- 1 stsp users - 207K Jun 5 2015 urtwn.fossil $ > (GIT has the repository inside the checkout). This is not the case with Got. By the way, thank you for trimming the list of recipients down to misc@,
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Mon, 6 Jan 2020, Sean Kamath wrote: > Having said that, I use whatever repo projects provide. I’m not here to > say VCS “A” is better than VCS “B”, just saying installing various > VCS’s under OpenBSD is pretty damn simple. It seems to be like the wars perl vs python, emacs vs vi, etc. But no, there are differences: it is groupware, about workflow. The appropriate VCS may depend on the way people works, see for example: https://www.fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki BTW, I like that the fossil repository may be everywhere, may easily created be moved to everyhere, that many checkouts may be easily open (GIT has the repository inside the checkout). It is indeed the VCS for "solo-repo people". And I like the simple format (RCS files) of CVS. Perhaps these things are les dependent from the workflow. It is an interesting thema, but perhaps off topic. Rodrigo
Re: But there is Fossil...
> On Jan 6, 2020, at 16:18, Constantine A. Murenin wrote: > > GitHub is so successful because it is non-trivial to get Git working. I found gitea trivial to install. Having said that, I use whatever repo projects provide. I’m not here to say VCS “A” is better than VCS “B”, just saying installing various VCS’s under OpenBSD is pretty damn simple. Sean
Re: But there is Fossil...
The problem with Fossil is lack of a driving force. GitHub is so successful because it is non-trivial to get Git working. Now that Git is a standard, there's a lot of copycats for GitHub itself, because every developer knows Git.* Fossil seems to be pretty easy to use all by itself, hence there's no service similar to GitHub, because the added value would be considerably smaller, plus you'll be going up against the giants like Git and GitHub; in fact, Bitbucket has already abandoned Mercurial support recently, embracing the monoculture of Git. If anyone's more interested in Fossil, http://fossil-scm.org/ website itself runs on Fossil (yes, it's self-hosted, and, yes, Fossil itself comes with a CMS, as well as a bug-tracking system), but there's also https://src.fossil.netbsd.org/ — the timeline interface is claimed to be the best feature of Fossil, it provides great visual representation of commits on all the branches as they happen; e.g., https://src.fossil.netbsd.org/timeline?n=50=2020-01-02+15:42:26 (in case there's nothing on branches on this link, see http://archive.is/dmKxZ , or http://web.archive.org/web/20200107001225/https://src.fossil.netbsd.org/timeline?n=50=2020-01-02+15:42:26 , which shows exactly which release branches were updated at what time and in what order). The other key difference of Fossil compared to Git is that the whole history of work is permanent, not transient like in Git's branch and squash-merge model, e.g., you don't just remove things (like branches) from the repository that were there yesterday, like in Git, and unlike in CVS or many other systems. Does it mean OpenBSD and/or NetBSD should switch to Fossil? No, that's not what I said. Cheers, Constantine. http://cm.su/
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 09:34:55PM +0100, Anders Andersson wrote: > One good thing with this trainwreck of a discussion is that it pointed > me to GoT. I've been looking for an alternative to CVS on my Amiga, > but git is too convoluted to even start trying to build on a > mostly-C89-semi-POSIX system. GoT seems like a much nicer starting > point. > > Good luck with that. I'm not quite sure Matt Dillon's unix compatibility goo is going to be enough to convince amigaos to build got
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 8:03 PM Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 06:28:48PM +, go...@disroot.org wrote: > > done reading that entire document, however, this is a topic about > > OpenBSD choosing Git over Fossil, but the actual problem is > > reimplementing Git (Game of Trees is a Git implementation just > > like OpenGit) and that's ridiculous, however, having read > > that PDF document I question: which of those problems are > > present in Fossil, not Git? in presence of those problems, > > why not wait for fix in Fossil instead of rushing to > > reimplement Git? I always see the point in two things: > > 1. using something existing > > 2. innovating something new > > > > Game of Trees and OpenGit are not innovations, they are > > implementations of existing innovation, if you've seen my > > first message, I suggested option 1 > > Look, if you don't like something why don't you just ignore it? > Instead of wasting time by writing pointless messages which the > many people on this list now have to delete from their inbox? > > The gameoftrees FAQ says: > "" > We don't need to hear your opinion that our project is pointless because > Git is superior. Thank you! > "" > The same applies to Fossil or whatever else anyone thinks is superior. > > Why should I care about your opinion on what I should be working > on in my spare time? It looks like you're just trying to annoy me. One good thing with this trainwreck of a discussion is that it pointed me to GoT. I've been looking for an alternative to CVS on my Amiga, but git is too convoluted to even start trying to build on a mostly-C89-semi-POSIX system. GoT seems like a much nicer starting point.
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 06:28:48PM +, go...@disroot.org wrote: > done reading that entire document, however, this is a topic about > OpenBSD choosing Git over Fossil, but the actual problem is > reimplementing Git (Game of Trees is a Git implementation just > like OpenGit) and that's ridiculous, however, having read > that PDF document I question: which of those problems are > present in Fossil, not Git? in presence of those problems, > why not wait for fix in Fossil instead of rushing to > reimplement Git? I always see the point in two things: > 1. using something existing > 2. innovating something new > > Game of Trees and OpenGit are not innovations, they are > implementations of existing innovation, if you've seen my > first message, I suggested option 1 Look, if you don't like something why don't you just ignore it? Instead of wasting time by writing pointless messages which the many people on this list now have to delete from their inbox? The gameoftrees FAQ says: "" We don't need to hear your opinion that our project is pointless because Git is superior. Thank you! "" The same applies to Fossil or whatever else anyone thinks is superior. Why should I care about your opinion on what I should be working on in my spare time? It looks like you're just trying to annoy me.
Re: But there is Fossil...
January 5, 2020 5:50 PM, "Diana Eichert" wrote: > On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 8:48 PM Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> > > SNIP > >> wow this is going downhill. random solo-repo people telling us what to do >> when Chuck Cranor and I started this whole export-the-repo model. >> >> get some perspective dude, hopefully in the jungle. > > It seems like a lot of people in this thread don't understand, a good > read is http://chuck.cranor.org/p/anoncvs.pdf > > It took me 10 seconds reading Chuck Cranor's web page to find it. > > Not certain why there has been so much noise on misc@ lately. done reading that entire document, however, this is a topic about OpenBSD choosing Git over Fossil, but the actual problem is reimplementing Git (Game of Trees is a Git implementation just like OpenGit) and that's ridiculous, however, having read that PDF document I question: which of those problems are present in Fossil, not Git? in presence of those problems, why not wait for fix in Fossil instead of rushing to reimplement Git? I always see the point in two things: 1. using something existing 2. innovating something new Game of Trees and OpenGit are not innovations, they are implementations of existing innovation, if you've seen my first message, I suggested option 1 there are OpenBSD innovations I really like: pf, doas, sndio
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Sat, Jan 4, 2020 at 8:48 PM Theo de Raadt wrote: > SNIP > wow this is going downhill. random solo-repo people telling us what to do > when Chuck Cranor and I started this whole export-the-repo model. > > get some perspective dude, hopefully in the jungle. It seems like a lot of people in this thread don't understand, a good read is http://chuck.cranor.org/p/anoncvs.pdf It took me 10 seconds reading Chuck Cranor's web page to find it. Not certain why there has been so much noise on misc@ lately.
Keep up the good work (was: Re: But there is Fossil...)
Stuart Henderson writes: > On 2020/01/05 00:33, go...@disroot.org wrote: > > January 5, 2020 2:24 AM, "Roderick" wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 2020, go...@disroot.org wrote: > > > > > >> so I don't understand what's wrong with FreeBSD and OpenBSD. > > > > > > I do not see a problem in CVS. > > > > Sure, but I started this thread because of OpenBSD's plan > > to migrate to Git. > > > > What plan? The plan which the OP would be aware doesn't exist were he to have bothered reading the FAQ he decided had too many words. Throwing away 30 years of work is A-OK, even expected, in this brave new CADT world so the alternative -- foundation technology should not be ripped out willy-nilly -- is an idea they simply cannot have. At this point it's clear he's either trolling or wilfully retarded. Either way not worth continuing with. To end positively I will add that a simpler git front-end, for want of a better term, will be a useful addition to the space of revision control tools. It's looking good so far. Keep it up. Matthew
Re: But there is Fossil...
>I am running Fossil to synchronize my ports work on >laptop and computer and I am amazed how easy it is, >how I wish I had my own domain to share my work >(both finished and WIP) to public... wow, you don't even have your own domain. you sound poor. that makes it easy to guess you don't know what it takes to run a large project where hundreds of people directly engage in the repository, and many thousands more observe. so you simply have no scope. you don't understand. you are utterly clueless what it takes to get to scale. so you don't know what you are talking about, and yet you show up here to preach. why don't you walk into the jungle and find some people to prosthelytize to? i'm going to guess that means go west. wow this is going downhill. random solo-repo people telling us what to do when Chuck Cranor and I started this whole export-the-repo model. get some perspective dude, hopefully in the jungle.
Re: But there is Fossil...
On 2020/01/05 00:33, go...@disroot.org wrote: > January 5, 2020 2:24 AM, "Roderick" wrote: > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 2020, go...@disroot.org wrote: > > > >> so I don't understand what's wrong with FreeBSD and OpenBSD. > > > > I do not see a problem in CVS. > > Sure, but I started this thread because of OpenBSD's plan > to migrate to Git. > What plan?
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Sun, Jan 05, 2020 at 12:33:58AM +, go...@disroot.org wrote: > January 5, 2020 2:24 AM, "Roderick" wrote: > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 2020, go...@disroot.org wrote: > > > >> so I don't understand what's wrong with FreeBSD and OpenBSD. > > > > I do not see a problem in CVS. > > Sure, but I started this thread because of OpenBSD's plan > to migrate to Git. Stop posting please.
Re: But there is Fossil...
January 5, 2020 2:24 AM, "Roderick" wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jan 2020, go...@disroot.org wrote: > >> so I don't understand what's wrong with FreeBSD and OpenBSD. > > I do not see a problem in CVS. Sure, but I started this thread because of OpenBSD's plan to migrate to Git.
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Sun, 5 Jan 2020, go...@disroot.org wrote: > so I don't understand what's wrong with FreeBSD and OpenBSD. I do not see a problem in CVS.
Re: But there is Fossil...
January 4, 2020 10:36 PM, "Roderick" wrote: > On Sat, 4 Jan 2020, Karel Gardas wrote: > >> Fossil is superfine and I'd like it for various reasons too, but >> unfortunately >> it does not scale to the OpenBSD repo size well. >> >> As a test, you can try and clone fossil repo of NetBSD and I'm sure you will >> find out quickly why people are working on GoT and OpenGIT. > > Perhaps no test necessary, but to read this: > > http://fossil-scm.org/home/technote/be8f2f3447ef2ea3344f8058b6733aa08c08336f > Thank you, this was a really nice read and once again I am sure that GoT and OpenGit are ridiculous, that issue in Fossil should be fixed soon, so I don't understand what's wrong with FreeBSD and OpenBSD. > But is there realy a need to substitute CVS? > > And why should be any repository Git or Got like Git? Because any script > must be python? > > And yes, I also like fossil very much. > > Rodrigo
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Sat, 4 Jan 2020, Karel Gardas wrote: > Fossil is superfine and I'd like it for various reasons too, but unfortunately > it does not scale to the OpenBSD repo size well. > > As a test, you can try and clone fossil repo of NetBSD and I'm sure you will > find out quickly why people are working on GoT and OpenGIT. Perhaps no test necessary, but to read this: http://fossil-scm.org/home/technote/be8f2f3447ef2ea3344f8058b6733aa08c08336f But is there realy a need to substitute CVS? And why should be any repository Git or Got like Git? Because any script must be python? And yes, I also like fossil very much. Rodrigo
Re: But there is Fossil...
Fossil is superfine and I'd like it for various reasons too, but unfortunately it does not scale to the OpenBSD repo size well. As a test, you can try and clone fossil repo of NetBSD and I'm sure you will find out quickly why people are working on GoT and OpenGIT. On 1/4/20 5:20 PM, go...@disroot.org wrote: Git is the most popular VCS (and most ugly), meanwhile there are people who prefer to reimplement it because they don't like its license... FreeBSD is working on OpenGit, OpenBSD is working on Game of Trees, but why reimplement the wheel instead of using a better solution: Fossil? I like CVS and SQLite used CVS in the past and then they INNOVATED Fossil - distributed version control system, usable as CVS, it has neat autosync feature, I don't need to explicitly use push and pull because that happens automatically. Fossil can also work with multiple branches at once (Git can work only with one branch at time). And Fossil's web UI is amazing, have you ever seen Fossil's timeline? I am sure people behind Fossil are the people who love CVS, they made CVS perfect (unlike people behind SVN). I am running Fossil to synchronize my ports work on laptop and computer and I am amazed how easy it is, how I wish I had my own domain to share my work (both finished and WIP) to public...
Re: But there is Fossil...
On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 04:59:40PM +, go...@disroot.org wrote: > I never read Please stop wasting our time then. Thanks, Florian -- I'm not entirely sure you are real.
Re: But there is Fossil...
January 4, 2020 6:45 PM, cho...@jtan.com wrote: > go...@disroot.org writes: > >> Git is the most popular VCS (and most ugly), meanwhile >> there are people who prefer to reimplement it because >> they don't like its license... FreeBSD is working on OpenGit, >> OpenBSD is working on Game of Trees, but why reimplement >> the wheel instead of using a better solution: Fossil? >> >> [snip 3 paragraphs of indecent exposure] > > How convenient that there is a tradition of collecting together the > questions that are asked frequently into a location that's easy to > find. A list of "Frequently Asked Questions", if you will. > > I'd never even heard of Game of Trees until your email yet I've > already been able to answer all of your questions by reading it's > own god-damn website. > > https://gameoftrees.org/faq.html > > Read The Fucking FAQ > > Matthew I never read entire FAQ, what I actually read is chosen based on header's name, if header's name does not match what I am looking for, I simply skip it to not waste time on reading what I don't need to know, so it was enough for me to read goals.
Re: But there is Fossil...
go...@disroot.org writes: > Git is the most popular VCS (and most ugly), meanwhile > there are people who prefer to reimplement it because > they don't like its license... FreeBSD is working on OpenGit, > OpenBSD is working on Game of Trees, but why reimplement > the wheel instead of using a better solution: Fossil? > > [snip 3 paragraphs of indecent exposure] How convenient that there is a tradition of collecting together the questions that are asked frequently into a location that's easy to find. A list of "Frequently Asked Questions", if you will. I'd never even heard of Game of Trees until your email yet I've already been able to answer all of your questions by reading it's own god-damn website. https://gameoftrees.org/faq.html Read The Fucking FAQ Matthew
But there is Fossil...
Git is the most popular VCS (and most ugly), meanwhile there are people who prefer to reimplement it because they don't like its license... FreeBSD is working on OpenGit, OpenBSD is working on Game of Trees, but why reimplement the wheel instead of using a better solution: Fossil? I like CVS and SQLite used CVS in the past and then they INNOVATED Fossil - distributed version control system, usable as CVS, it has neat autosync feature, I don't need to explicitly use push and pull because that happens automatically. Fossil can also work with multiple branches at once (Git can work only with one branch at time). And Fossil's web UI is amazing, have you ever seen Fossil's timeline? I am sure people behind Fossil are the people who love CVS, they made CVS perfect (unlike people behind SVN). I am running Fossil to synchronize my ports work on laptop and computer and I am amazed how easy it is, how I wish I had my own domain to share my work (both finished and WIP) to public...
