sourceforge?

[snowangyl]

looks like sourceforge SVN just died

anyone having issues? (at the time of this post i mean)

i can't even access sourceforge.net

[alexismedina]

I think it was a temporally problem, now it's working (at least for me)

[adjam]

Plans about git moving?

[Ruben]

yep:)
see http://www.codingdomain.com/blog/archiv ... o-Git.html and more

[Vistaus]

yep:)
see http://www.codingdomain.com/blog/archiv ... o-Git.html and more

I think SVN is much more simple to use for the end-users. So please reconsider moving to git. Also, all programs in KDE-extragear use SVN instead of GIT.

[pano]

Git is not as hard as you might think it is Once you get used to it is is nice
Example:
"svn update" equals to "git pull origin"

[Vistaus]

I know, I pulled in Raptor via Git. Even after asking on the Ubuntu forums, I still don't know how to update the Git-version of Raptor. Nobody on the Ubuntu forums knows the command for that. If I ask something regarding SVN on there, everybody knows the answer. And even then, what is easier: svn up([[MARKED AS SPAM]]) or git pull origin? svn update is much more easier. At least, that's my opinion.

[vdboor]

That should imho just be a matter of time, and a good tutorial on our site.

After all, leaving users in the dark kind of defeats the whole purpose of having people look at development versions..

[pano]

I know, I pulled in Raptor via Git. Even after asking on the Ubuntu forums, I still don't know how to update the Git-version of Raptor.

Even if it is a bit OT

What do you mean with "update the Git-Version" of Raptor?

Also something I'd like to point out is:

You shouldn't decide not to switch to git or any other DVCS (Decentralised Versioning Control System) solely because of the (on the first sight) "harder" commands.
You should decide after comparing the features and finding out what suits your purpose best.

Also I'm pretty sure that when/if KMess switches to git we'll have a nice little topic here explaining stuff like "Compiling/Updating from Git"

[fontknocker]

It's probably "when", not "if", since at some point we'd like to move into extragear, and KDE is moving to Git, so we'll have to move there anyway

Cheap local branching? Staged commits? I quite like those...

[Vistaus]

Noooo... Why is KDE moving to Git?

Also, what does Git have that SVN doesn't have (I mean for KMess purpose)?

@pano: With updating raptor I mean updating the Git-version, you know like you update an SVN-version of a program with svn up([[MARKED AS SPAM]]).

[pano]

@Vistaus:

about the raptor thingy:
As I already said, just do a "git pull origin" in the raptor directory to update your Raptor.
about the Git thingy:
There are several advantages imho especially for big projects like KDE (that's why the kernel and GNOME already use Git).
For KMess specifically I'd say some of the advantages (that SVN does not offer) are:

* You can commit changes without being connected to the internet, which is a really nice feature when you are on a travel without internet connection (note: svn commit is not the same as git commit. svn commit equals to "git commit" and "git push")
* Branching is easy: Instead of working mainly on mainline/master (which is the equivalent to trunk in SVN) you do your work in branches, once you finishes your work you merge the branch with master. This is (at least sounds like to me as a non-developer) a "cleaner method" of coding.
* You don't need an svn account to contribute stuff anymore: You clone yourself the KMess repo, do your changes and once you're finished you can perform a merge request, so that your changes are "integrated" into mainline

Here's a website that illustrates the difference between a Centralised Versioning Control System (like SVN) and a DVCS (like Git):
http://betterexplained.com/articles/int ... lustrated/

[Vistaus]

Ok, fair enough. But:

1 How many times would it happen that the developers have no internet connection? And how is it even possible to commit something without internet? But it's a nice feature though.
2 SVN also supports that, but a little bit different than Git.
3 I don't think that is quite an advantage, because it doesn't take very much time to create an account on SVN imho. And also Git requires you to login sometimes, at least if you want a non-read-only copy of the branch.

[pano]

1 How many times would it happen that the developers have no internet connection? And how is it even possible to commit something without internet? But it's a nice feature though.

As I already stated: git commit is not exactly the same as svn commit. By doing "git commit" you commit your changes to your local repository. For this action you do not need an internet connection. In order to have those changes "publicly" available in the master repo, you have to do an additional "git push", which of course needs an internet connection

2 SVN also supports that, but a little bit different than Git.

I'm not a SVN or Git expert, but from what I've "experienced" the big difference is:
Working with branches on SVN is slow:
When branching in SVN, you get a complete copy of the folder/repo you branched. This means double amount of space needed.
In Git working with branches is faster:
When branching in Git, the files are not copied to another location. They stay where they are, and somehow only the changed files are "copied" somewhere else (I don't know how exactly Git handles this, but it should be something like that)

3 I don't think that is quite an advantage, because it doesn't take very much time to create an account on SVN imho. And also Git requires you to login sometimes, at least if you want a non-read-only copy of the branch.

When you give somebody a SVN account, you have to trust him, because once he has an account, he has access to all the files (I heard of ways to restrict this, but I don't know how hard/easy they are to configure)
In Git you only have acces to your own clone (and the master repo, if you have access to it), thus the barrier of people contributing can be lowered, as you don't need to have a full SVN account anymore.

About the logging in "issue":
Actually you have to enter a password/"login" on both SVN and Git if you want to access to the (remote) repository.
On Gitorious (where afaik KDE probably will move to) you need an SSH key which you have to enter everytime you push some changes to your remote repository.
With SVN you have to enter your Password.

Of course you can somehow configure Git/SVN to store that password, so that you don't have to enter it everytime



pano

[Vistaus]

Thanks for the explanation Still one question though:

"[...] thus the barrier of people contributing to it can be lowered."

Wasn't the aspect of open source the fact that everybody can contribute to it? So now that's somewhat killed, because less people can contribute. Or do I misunderstand you?

[pano]

Thanks for the explanation Still one question though:

"[...] thus the barrier of people contributing to it can be lowered."

Wasn't the aspect of open source the fact that everybody can contribute to it? So now that's somewhat killed, because less people can contribute. Or do I misunderstand you?

Moving to Git doesn't meant that less people are able to contribute, it just means it'll be easier to "directly" contribute
I guess I didn't explain that point well enough

[Vistaus]

Ok, now I get it Well, then I hope I will understand how to work with Git when KMess and KDE moves to it...

[fontknocker]

Ok, now I get it Well, then I hope I will understand how to work with Git when KMess and KDE moves to it...

There will be many guides around; don't worry about that