From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Riley Subject: Re: Re: Git recommendations Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:47:42 +0100 Message-ID: <91mygp6fjl.fsf@development.richardriley.net> References: <874p2xj563.fsf@transitory.lefae.org> <87skqhhotl.fsf@transitory.lefae.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KuX87-0006oe-7W for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:47:55 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KuX85-0006lk-NI for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:47:54 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53747 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KuX85-0006lI-DW for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:47:53 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.153]:56261) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KuX84-0001OJ-2R for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 14:47:53 -0400 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so2171389fgb.30 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:47:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87skqhhotl.fsf@transitory.lefae.org> (Ross Patterson's message of "Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:31:50 -0700") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ross Patterson Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Ross Patterson writes: > Richard Riley writes: > >> Ross Patterson writes: >> >>> Richard Riley writes: >>> >>>> I've just spent a short time giving the crash test dummy procedure to a >>>> few git interfaces for emacs. All have their benefits. A lot have their >>>> negatives, But my immediate favourite for anyone thinking of using emacs >>>> interface to git for org is the following: >>>> >>>> http://tsgates.cafe24.com/git/git-emacs.html#sec1>> >>>> It doesn't come with a lot of default key bindings but the two most >>>> important for those familiar with vc-backend are there: >>>> >>>> C-x v v >>>> and >>>> C-x v = >>>> >>>> git-diff interfaces nicely to ediff. >>>> >>>> And the best thing is the one key press from git-status to bring up the >>>> wonderful "gitk" GUI interface which I wasn't aware of! Truly brilliant >>>> admin interface for git external to emacs. >>>> >>>> The best part of all is that it provides simple easy to see icons in the >>>> emacs status bar to show the git status. magic and egg tend to >>>> git-status centric as opposed to file centric. emacs-git is a nice >>>> mixture. It palms off the log/history interface to gitk - no need to >>>> reinvent the wheel. >>>> >>>> Simple, powerful, extensible. Recommended. >>>> >>>> Oh, but missing staging .... which magit and egg support but vc-git, >>>> git.el and emacs-git do not. I think ... >>> >>> I'm curious, did you evaluate dvc? >>> >>> http://www.xsteve.at/prg/emacs_dvc/dvc.html >> >> Nope. Damn. And why not? Because there was not a link on the Emacs Wiki >> for Git interfaces. And it didnt turn up in my basic Google. >> >> http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/Git >> >> :-( > > Yeah, and I'll add the lack of a *.deb for DVC to that complaint. :( > Maybe one of us ought to let the DVC folks know of our > complaints... Nah! :) A Debian package? I gave up on them and installed CVS emacs 23. Why? The debian installation setup is simply too complex and kind of got me a blank stare from the gurus in irc #emacs. It's much nicer using a git emacs repository and getting the stuff I need manually. Also much easier to sync between different machines since each emacs directory is pretty much self contained. > >>> It aims to be a common emacs front end for most distributed version >>> control systems. >> >> Thanks for the pointer. >> >> I'll take a look. I like common interfaces. There's enough key strokes >> to remember in emacs as it is. >> >> But I must say emacs-git impresses me the more I play with it. And git >> itself just seems to be a solution that was waiting for a problem to >> invent it. It's simply "nice and clean" from what i can gather of it. > > Well in all honesty, I've barely used git at all and I've only used DVC > for hg/mercurial, just thought you might want to get a look at it. :) > > Ross I just started to read about git's history. You have to love Torwalds. He shoots from the hip as well as being a smart sod. http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/04/19/HNtorvaldswork_1.html ,---- | Torvalds seemed aware that his decision to drop BitKeeper would also be | controversial. When asked why he called the new software, "git," British | slang meaning "a rotten person," he said. "I'm an egotistical bastard, | so I name all my projects after myself. First Linux, now git." `---- Sure. I bet there's someone at BitKeeper whose name begins with "g" ... Although I notice the letters "git" are in the first 5 letters of Tridgell too. Nah ... ,---- | Torvalds is clearly unhappy about being forced off BitMover. He called | Tridgell's client a "bad project," and said that the software it | produced has no benefit to Linux developers, BitMover, or even Tridgell | himself. | | "It ended up hurting people that didn't agree with (Tridgell)," he said | of the software. "And it doesn't actually help anybody, since it only | assured its own irrelevance by making BitKeeper no longer be available." | | In the last week, Linux's creator has come under fire for publicly | slamming Tridgell's efforts. Critics say that Tridgell's | reverse-engineering of BitKeeper is analagous to the work Torvalds | himself has done with Linux, which itself is based on Unix. | | But in the e-mail interview Torvalds explained his perspective, using | his usual brand of utilitarianism. | | According to Torvalds, Tridgell's software was "bad" simply because it | ultimately served no useful purpose. "To me, a program is only as good | as what it does," he said. "In this case, it only caused problems." `----