Pages: 1
  Print  
Author Topic: Use git instead of SVN.  (Read 2879 times)
Offline (Male) RetroX
Posted on: January 01, 2012, 04:47:29 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
Because it's better.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Unknown gender) luiscubal
Reply #1 Posted on: January 01, 2012, 04:56:43 PM
Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 452

View Profile Email
Do you really care?
I mean, will you take advantage of forking, etc.? Are you planning to switch to github? Something like that?
Logged
Offline (Male) polygone
Reply #2 Posted on: January 01, 2012, 05:41:21 PM

Contributor
Location: England
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 803

View Profile
github sucks balls
Logged
I honestly don't know wtf I'm talking about but hopefully I can muddle my way through.
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #3 Posted on: January 01, 2012, 05:42:29 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
Do you really care?
I mean, will you take advantage of forking, etc.? Are you planning to switch to github? Something like that?
No, I'm saying that it would be easier to manage if it were turned into a git repostory.

SVN is terrible to work with.

And yes, forking would enable regular users to contribute changes and test them and then offer them back to the dev team.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Male) Rusky
Reply #4 Posted on: January 02, 2012, 09:05:06 AM

Resident Troll
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 955
MSN Messenger - rpjohnst@gmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
Git will solve actual problems that have already been encountered several times.

For example, as RetroX described, users without commit privileges will be able to work on potential contributions without abandoning version control. Projects like JoshEdit support could be put in a separate branch without killing Ism's working directory (git stash would be helpful here as well). Updates would be much faster and repositories (somewhat ironically) smaller, or at last comparable in size. For Linux developers, the version control tool itself would also be much faster.

Also, if ENIGMA further switched to GitHub, the web interface for viewing changes and files would be improved by about a factor of infinity.
Logged
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #5 Posted on: January 02, 2012, 11:09:53 AM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2959

View Profile Email
I thought I replied to this thread.

Switching would bring serious benefit to the tagging system; it takes too fucking long and consistently fails trying to mark the trunk as stable or testing. So huge benefit to be gained.

Difficulty is, everything is already set up in LGM to use SVN for downloading updates, via SVNkit. JGit seems to be what we'd look to for its replacement.

Also, the Wiki install pages all give SVN checkout instructions; those would either need to be replaced or supplemented (in case we want to keep the SVN version current) with the git how-tos.

If either of you are volunteering, I'll be happy to make the switch. I don't speak for Ism.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #6 Posted on: January 02, 2012, 12:24:07 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
I'd be willing to do it.  Or help out, at least.

I can set up a repo here if someone gives me the permissions.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Female) IsmAvatar
Reply #7 Posted on: January 03, 2012, 04:37:32 PM

LateralGM Developer
LGM Developer
Location: Pennsylvania/USA
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 886

View Profile Email
When I get the chance, I'll start porting the updater to JGit (and/or browse for alternatives to JGit). It's completely self-contained, as can be seen by the method of turning it off (just delete svnkit.jar).

If you guys want to go ahead and start porting ENIGMA's SVN to GIT, whatever that entails, be my guest. It'll make my job easier because then I'll have a working repository to test against.

Unfortunately, while I have a ton of experience with SVN, I only have a tiny bit of experience with GIT, so either I'm going to have to do some learning, or someone else is going to have to be our resident repository expert.
Logged
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #8 Posted on: January 03, 2012, 09:42:25 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
Unfortunately, while I have a ton of experience with SVN, I only have a tiny bit of experience with GIT, so either I'm going to have to do some learning, or someone else is going to have to be our resident repository expert.
I know loads about git, so, I can tell you want if/when needed. When you're developing on Linux, I recommend looking into gitg; it's an extremely useful commit history visualiser (particularly with branches) and supports mediocre staging/committing.

Essentially, Git works off of unstaged, staged, stashed, and committed changes:
  • Unstaged changes are just unversioned file changes.
  • Staged changes are the changes that are ready to commit.
  • Stashed changes are sort of halfway between unstaged and staged; they work somewhat like stacks.  You can stash changes if you want to keep changes that you've made on hand while returning back to the last versioned state.
  • Git operates as a fully local repo with links to other repos. On your own repository, you can commit and uncommit as much as you want, and when you're ready, you can push those changes to another repo. You can also pull changes from said repo. You can technically uncommit on your local repo even if you've pushed changes, but then, you'll have problems when you want to push new changes forward.
  • I don't fully understand how SVN's branches work, but git's are essentially "branching" off of an existing commit.  Essentially, what this means is that on your new branch, all changes will be inherited up until a point, and then, you'll only inherit future commits on that branch.  You can merge branches, too.  You can stash changes and switch branches if you want to save your work from another branch while saving your progress on another. From what I've heard of SVN's, those are more of "let's create a repo within a repo and not care about past changes"
  • Git also supports cherry-picking, which enables you to pull single commits from one branch onto another.
  • Git's version control is object-based, not file-based (like SVN). This means that renames will not bork the entire system, but getting a single file's commit history is slightly more difficult.


Git operates based off of changes and merges a lot better than SVN does.  If you modify the first half of a file in one branch, then the second half in another, git can merge both changes without a problem.  It's only where these changes intersect that it causes problems (such as two branches changing the same line).

There are loads of things that you can actually do with it, but I'll explain them as they're needed rather than all at once.  Plus, you probably know a lot of it.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Female) IsmAvatar
Reply #9 Posted on: January 04, 2012, 03:36:48 PM

LateralGM Developer
LGM Developer
Location: Pennsylvania/USA
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 886

View Profile Email
SVN's branches are just total copies of one folder to another. This takes up very little space, since it can just say "this is the same as folder X at revision Y". It does actually have the full history behind each file, due to this linking nature. The branch does, however, get out of date if you don't merge the trunk with it, which means you should either regularly merge, or merge before reintegrating.

SVN has actually gotten a lot smarter at merging files, too. Usually you can merge a file with changes on both ends without issue, provided you didn't modify the same line. Every now and then it does get fussy over something silly, though.


Just to clarify what SVN does. I, of course, see loads of benefits to using GIT over SVN, provided I can figure out how to work it.
Logged
Pages: 1
  Print