Git repository

Git repository

[Carsten Dominik]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 250 bytes --]

Hi,

I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public git  
repository.

This is not yet sure and official, but if you want to take a look at the
current state of the repository, check out

http://repo.or.cz/w/org-mode.git

- Carsten

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1964 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Git repository

[Phil Jackson]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public git
> repository.

This is a great move. Will you be taking on other "core" developers
with push access?

Cheers,
Phil
-- 
 Phil Jackson
 http://www.shellarchive.co.uk

Re: Git repository

[Bernt Hansen]

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public git repository.
>
> This is not yet sure and official, but if you want to take a look at the
> current state of the repository, check out
>
> http://repo.or.cz/w/org-mode.git

\o/   :)

I love git...  everything else sucks by comparison :)

Bernt

Re: Git repository

[Carsten Dominik]

On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:

> Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
>
>> I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public  
>> git repository.
>>
>> This is not yet sure and official, but if you want to take a look  
>> at the
>> current state of the repository, check out
>>
>> http://repo.or.cz/w/org-mode.git
>
> \o/   :)
>
> I love git...  everything else sucks by comparison :)

As far as I can see, mercurial is pretty similar.  But
compared to cvs, svn, yes, I totally agree.  No looking back.

- Carsten

Re: Re: Git repository

[Russell Adams]

I'm a bazaar fan myself. I'd be curious if someone can point out where
git is superior. ;]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 04:39:50PM +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> 
> On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:
> 
> >Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
> >
> >>I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public  
> >>git repository.
> >>
> >>This is not yet sure and official, but if you want to take a look  
> >>at the
> >>current state of the repository, check out
> >>
> >>http://repo.or.cz/w/org-mode.git
> >
> >\o/   :)
> >
> >I love git...  everything else sucks by comparison :)
> 
> As far as I can see, mercurial is pretty similar.  But
> compared to cvs, svn, yes, I totally agree.  No looking back.
> 
> - Carsten
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode


------------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Adams                            RLAdams@AdamsInfoServ.com

PGP Key ID:     0x1160DCB3           http://www.adamsinfoserv.com/

Fingerprint:    1723 D8CA 4280 1EC9 557F  66E8 1154 E018 1160 DCB3

Re: Re: Git repository

[Adam Spiers]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 10:01:13AM -0600, Russell Adams wrote:
> I'm a bazaar fan myself. I'd be curious if someone can point out where
> git is superior. ;]

I can't remember the details, but I'm pretty sure that I saw reference
to issues with the design of the underlying backend.  The most obvious
symptom of this would be the performance difference - git is
well-known to cream pretty much everything except mercurial (which
IIRC has a very similar design, minus the object packing).

But I'm sure some quick googling would tell you a lot more than my
hazy memories do :-)

Re: Re: Git repository

[Adam Spiers]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 04:39:50PM +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:
> 
> >Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
> >>I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public  
> >>git repository.

This would be superb!

> >>This is not yet sure and official, but if you want to take a look  
> >>at the
> >>current state of the repository, check out
> >>
> >>http://repo.or.cz/w/org-mode.git
> >
> >\o/   :)
> >
> >I love git...  everything else sucks by comparison :)
> 
> As far as I can see, mercurial is pretty similar.  But
> compared to cvs, svn, yes, I totally agree.  No looking back.

Hear hear!  mercurial is very similar, and the two of them seem to be
streaks ahead of pretty much everything else.

Re: Re: Git repository

[Hugo Schmitt]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1192 bytes --]

I use mercurial just because it's supposed to work better with windows
(work).
-Hugo

On Jan 31, 2008 1:34 PM, Adam Spiers <orgmode@adamspiers.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 04:39:50PM +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> > On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:33 PM, Bernt Hansen wrote:
> >
> > >Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
> > >>I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public
> > >>git repository.
>
> This would be superb!
>
> > >>This is not yet sure and official, but if you want to take a look
> > >>at the
> > >>current state of the repository, check out
> > >>
> > >>http://repo.or.cz/w/org-mode.git
> > >
> > >\o/   :)
> > >
> > >I love git...  everything else sucks by comparison :)
> >
> > As far as I can see, mercurial is pretty similar.  But
> > compared to cvs, svn, yes, I totally agree.  No looking back.
>
> Hear hear!  mercurial is very similar, and the two of them seem to be
> streaks ahead of pretty much everything else.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1978 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Re: Git repository

[Bastien]

Adam Spiers <orgmode@adamspiers.org> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 10:01:13AM -0600, Russell Adams wrote:
>> I'm a bazaar fan myself. I'd be curious if someone can point out where
>> git is superior. ;]
>
> I can't remember the details, but I'm pretty sure that I saw reference
> to issues with the design of the underlying backend.  The most obvious
> symptom of this would be the performance difference - git is
> well-known to cream pretty much everything except mercurial (which
> IIRC has a very similar design, minus the object packing).
>
> But I'm sure some quick googling would tell you a lot more than my
> hazy memories do :-)

FYI Eric S. Raymond is working on a paper where all dVCS systems will be
compared.  The Emacs dev team is waiting for his conclusions in order to
decide what system should be used instead of the actual CVS.  

But there is more to consider than technical benchmarks since RMS also
insist on preferring a tool that is part of the GNU project.  Of course
this doesn't affect the choice of a tool for Org, and git sounds like a
good one to me.

-- 
Bastien

Re: Re: Git repository

[Russell Adams]

When I was selecting a VC, I narrowed it down to Bazaar or Git. Being
a prior Arch user, Bazaar fixed most of my complaints while using the
same architecture.

I understand Git's got quite a following, and addresses many of the
same shortcomings of CVS that Bazaar and other distributed VC's
(darcs, mercurial, etc) do.

I have been curious what Git could offer over Bazaar, other than
optimization for large numbers of users checking out. I recall Linus
said that Bazaar was too slow. ;]

My requirements were easy branching and merging, plus no special
servers needed (ie: ftp/http/ssh).

Ironically, I rarely use VC with Org files, because most of my files
have a short lifespan (1 per project).

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 06:34:23PM +0100, Bastien wrote:
> Adam Spiers <orgmode@adamspiers.org> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 10:01:13AM -0600, Russell Adams wrote:
> >> I'm a bazaar fan myself. I'd be curious if someone can point out where
> >> git is superior. ;]
> >
> > I can't remember the details, but I'm pretty sure that I saw reference
> > to issues with the design of the underlying backend.  The most obvious
> > symptom of this would be the performance difference - git is
> > well-known to cream pretty much everything except mercurial (which
> > IIRC has a very similar design, minus the object packing).
> >
> > But I'm sure some quick googling would tell you a lot more than my
> > hazy memories do :-)
> 
> FYI Eric S. Raymond is working on a paper where all dVCS systems will be
> compared.  The Emacs dev team is waiting for his conclusions in order to
> decide what system should be used instead of the actual CVS.  
> 
> But there is more to consider than technical benchmarks since RMS also
> insist on preferring a tool that is part of the GNU project.  Of course
> this doesn't affect the choice of a tool for Org, and git sounds like a
> good one to me.
> 
> -- 
> Bastien
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode


------------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Adams                            RLAdams@AdamsInfoServ.com

PGP Key ID:     0x1160DCB3           http://www.adamsinfoserv.com/

Fingerprint:    1723 D8CA 4280 1EC9 557F  66E8 1154 E018 1160 DCB3

Re: Git repository

[Jason Riedy]

And Russell Adams writes:
> When I was selecting a VC, I narrowed it down to Bazaar or Git. Being
> a prior Arch user, Bazaar fixed most of my complaints while using the
> same architecture.

The Arch architecture doesn't fit everyone.  In particular, a
colleague and I used tla to shoot changes back and forth rapidly.
We ended up with a history with at least 40% merge detritus.  git
doesn't bother recording merge information when the merge is
trivial (a fast-forward of one history to match another).  That
fit our working model and my mental model better.

Generally, git tracks contents rather than changes.  That's how
my head works as well, so most git functions do what I expect and
want.  Any technical differences are insignificant in comparison.

Git and Mercurial archives can exist on the far side of a "dumb"
transport like http.  They're not ideal necessarily, but they
function well enough.

Jason

Re: Git repository

[Carsten Dominik]

On Jan 31, 2008, at 4:31 PM, Phil Jackson wrote:

> Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
>
>> I am considering the idea to move the org development to a public git
>> repository.
>
> This is a great move. Will you be taking on other "core" developers
> with push access?


Yes, this is the plan.  Bastien, David, and Piotr immediately for
possible changes to their own files.  More people, that will depend
on FSF papers signed and on a working model on how to integrate changes
into the main distribution.  Maybe push for branches, so that other  
people can
try out changes.  I am still working out the details with git,
need some more time.

- Carsten