Where top publish my creations?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Where top publish my creations?

Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud)
Hallo allemaal,


Marko schreef:
> I have been meaning to publish my source repositories, ...

I have been thinking about that to. I don't want to depend on one provider.


Patryk schreef:
> Just use github.com OR bitbucket.org OR gitlab.com. In order of "momentum".

Groepaz schreef:
> or use sourceforge

Your experiences and advice, please? TIA!


Met vriendelijke groet / With kind regards, Ruud Baltissen

www.Baltissen.org









De informatie in dit e-mailbericht is vertrouwelijk en uitsluitend bestemd voor de
geadresseerde. Wanneer u dit bericht per abuis ontvangt, verzoeken wij u contact op te
nemen met de afzender per kerende e-mail. Verder verzoeken wij u in dat geval dit
e-mailbericht te vernietigen en de inhoud ervan aan niemand openbaar te maken.
Wij aanvaarden geen aansprakelijkheid voor onjuiste, onvolledige dan wel ontijdige
overbrenging van de inhoud van een verzonden e-mailbericht, noch voor daarbij
overgebrachte virussen.

APG Groep N.V. is gevestigd te Heerlen en is ingeschreven in het
handelsregister van de Kamer van Koophandel Limburg onder nummer 14099617


The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be privileged.
It may be read, copied and used only by the intended recipient.
If you have received it in error, please contact the sender immediately by
return e-mail; please delete in this case the e-mail and do not disclose its
contents to any person. We don't accept liability for any errors, omissions,
delays of receipt or viruses in the contents of this message which arise as a
result of e-mail transmission.

APG Groep N.V. is registered in the trade register of the Chamber
of Commerce Limburg, The Netherlands, registration number: 14099617


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl

> On 2018-03-15, at 07:27, Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud) <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I have been meaning to publish my source repositories, ...
>
> I have been thinking about that to. I don't want to depend on one provider.
>
> Patryk schreef:
>> Just use github.com OR bitbucket.org OR gitlab.com. In order of "momentum".
>
> Groepaz schreef:
>> or use sourceforge
>
> Your experiences and advice, please? TIA!

Github is the Google of sources hosting today. This has it pros and cons but it is the "go to" choice. Bitbucket is well established and has somewhat better terms for individuals (free private repos for a good example). Preferred by those who don't like to "mix with the crowd". Gitlab is gaining some momentum but I _feel_ like it's somewhat lagging behind in terms of being the well established choice. And - as gpz pointed out - if you use sourceforge, everybody and their dog (including /me) will start to bash you for choosing the most badly sucking service to host your product. This is the free publicity, gpz wrote about :-))

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

Segher Boessenkool
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 09:32:16AM +0100, [hidden email] wrote:
> > On 2018-03-15, at 07:27, Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Your experiences and advice, please? TIA!
>
> Github is the Google of sources hosting today. This has it pros and cons but it is the "go to" choice. Bitbucket is well established and has somewhat better terms for individuals (free private repos for a good example). Preferred by those who don't like to "mix with the crowd". Gitlab is gaining some momentum but I _feel_ like it's somewhat lagging behind in terms of being the well established choice. And - as gpz pointed out - if you use sourceforge, everybody and their dog (including /me) will start to bash you for choosing the most badly sucking service to host your product. This is the free publicity, gpz wrote about :-))

And as long as you use git it doesn't matter much: even if the hosting
site goes down forever you can still migrate elsewhere without any
data loss, without much hassle even (except that you have to tell your
users about the move).


Segher

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl

> On 2018-03-15, at 09:48, Segher Boessenkool <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>> Your experiences and advice, please? TIA!
>>
>> Github is the Google of sources hosting today. This has it pros and cons but it is the "go to" choice. Bitbucket is well established and has somewhat better terms for individuals (free private repos for a good example). Preferred by those who don't like to "mix with the crowd". Gitlab is gaining some momentum but I _feel_ like it's somewhat lagging behind in terms of being the well established choice. And - as gpz pointed out - if you use sourceforge, everybody and their dog (including /me) will start to bash you for choosing the most badly sucking service to host your product. This is the free publicity, gpz wrote about :-))
>
> And as long as you use git it doesn't matter much: even if the hosting
> site goes down forever you can still migrate elsewhere without any
> data loss, without much hassle even (except that you have to tell your
> users about the move).

Yeah, I forgot to add that as I felt it like being "obvious" but you are right. It might not be obvious for everyone. In general git is the choice these days, unless you are e. g. Google and have your own, customised VCS.

--
SD!


smf
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

smf
On 15/03/2018 09:27, [hidden email] wrote:
> Yeah, I forgot to add that as I felt it like being "obvious" but you
> are right. It might not be obvious for everyone. In general git is the
> choice these days, unless you are e. g. Google and have your own,
> customised VCS.

The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when
looking at history on their web interface, it's also limited in terms of
number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked it up
for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might suffer
the same problem.

The horrible git clients are IMO more of an issue. TortoiseGit on
windows sucks pretty bad, but it's still the best graphical ui client I
tried. Using a command line tool would take too much time out of my day.

I'd still use git though, because having to remember how to use two
horrible source control systems is too much hassle.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl

> On 2018-03-15, at 10:52, smf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 15/03/2018 09:27, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Yeah, I forgot to add that as I felt it like being "obvious" but you are right. It might not be obvious for everyone. In general git is the choice these days, unless you are e. g. Google and have your own, customised VCS.
>
> The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when looking at history on their web interface

Well, I know no web interface that would allow that. Or I didn't look too closely ;-)

I even wrote a rant once about this:

https://tinyurl.com/yapz4xuw

Note also comment below.

> , it's also limited in terms of number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked it up for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might suffer the same problem.

Web interface shouldn't be the default one to use. I urge everyone to learn the - if only the very basic - flow, using command line. As long as you don't need interactive rebase, squashing, amending or whatever advanced topics, you'll be thankful.

> The horrible git clients are IMO more of an issue. TortoiseGit on windows sucks pretty bad, but it's still the best graphical ui client I tried. Using a command line tool would take too much time out of my day.

I believe that using horrible GUI clients takes too much of people's days. Just learn the basic flow and you'll have noticeably more time for doing productive work :-)

--
SD!


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

Marko Mäkelä
In reply to this post by smf
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 09:52:42AM +0000, smf wrote:
>The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when
>looking at history on their web interface, it's also limited in terms
>of number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked
>it up for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might
>suffer the same problem.

I believe that this is an inherent limitation of the git repository
format. My understanding is that unlike bzr and svn, git does not really
track renames. There is no concept like the bzr file-id. Also there is
nothing that directly corresponds to the "svn copy" operation. If you
copy and modify a file, "git blame" would not show the original history
of the file, while "svn blame" would. Also bzr never implemented "bzr
copy".

By having a simpler repository format, git is making it a little easier
for the writers, and harder for readers who are interested in tracking
changes. Also, thanks to the simpler format, switching between arbitrary
revisions as well as operations like "git grep" or "git log -G" are very
fast. I am not aware of these operations existing in svn or bzr, or
maybe they would be so slow that they would be useless.

>The horrible git clients are IMO more of an issue. TortoiseGit on
>windows sucks pretty bad, but it's still the best graphical ui client I
>tried. Using a command line tool would take too much time out of my
>day.

I am pretty happy with the git command-line tools as well as the
integration with GNU Emacs.

>I'd still use git though, because having to remember how to use two
>horrible source control systems is too much hassle.

I guess I should convert my svn repositories to git and upload to
GitHub. I already have a work-related account there. The point that each
checked out copy of the repository is a full backup of the history is
very valid, and works like an insurance if the free-as-in-beer service
of the closed-source GitHub goes away.

I should also find out if there are any usable svn-to-git gateways. I
would prefer to keep my own repositories in svn fsfs format, because it
is very rsync-friendly for making backups: each commit is 2 new files
with understandable names (svn revision is the number of commits since
the start). The git repository format with lots of files named by some
hash values is totally opaque to me.

        Marko

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl

> On 2018-03-15, at 11:37, Marko Mäkelä <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 09:52:42AM +0000, smf wrote:
>> The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when looking at history on their web interface, it's also limited in terms of number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked it up for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might suffer the same problem.
>
> I believe that this is an inherent limitation of the git repository format.

True.

> My understanding is that unlike bzr and svn, git does not really track renames.

True.

> I guess I should convert my svn repositories to git and upload to GitHub. I already have a work-related account there. The point that each checked out copy of the repository is a full backup of the history is very valid

That's why it is not called "checkout" but rather "clone", therefore proper statement would read "every cloned copy of the repository [...]". "Checkout" means something somewhat different in git terminology.

> , and works like an insurance if the free-as-in-beer service of the closed-source GitHub goes away.

For a good example.

> I should also find out if there are any usable svn-to-git gateways. I would prefer to keep my own repositories in svn fsfs format, because it is very rsync-friendly for making backups: each commit is 2 new files with understandable names (svn revision is the number of commits since the start). The git repository format with lots of files named by some hash values is totally opaque to me.

It is definitely possible. For example Spiro here is also involved with cc65, where a big transition from SVN to git has taken place some time ago. To my understanding he participated in the process.

--
SD!


smf
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

smf

On 15/03/2018 10:44, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when looking at history on their web interface, it's also limited in terms of number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked it up for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might suffer the same problem.
>> I believe that this is an inherent limitation of the git repository format.
> True.

I believe it's up to the git client to follow renames, which in this
case is the github web server. It was raised as an issue with github and
they said they would support it, but never did. Whether it's because
they are scared of the extra processing required I don't know. I believe
there is a chrome plugin which hacks round it but I don't use the web
interface much because of the issues so I never tried it.

> I believe that using horrible GUI clients takes too much of people's days. Just learn the basic flow and you'll have noticeably more time for doing productive work :-)

I know people who share your opinion, they are always accidentally
commiting code that they didn't mean to because it's too hard for them
to see what they are actually pushing.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl
In reply to this post by Marko Mäkelä

> On 2018-03-15, at 11:37, Marko Mäkelä <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I should also find out if there are any usable svn-to-git gateways. I would prefer to keep my own repositories in svn fsfs format, because it is very rsync-friendly for making backups: each commit is 2 new files with understandable names (svn revision is the number of commits since the start). The git repository format with lots of files named by some hash values is totally opaque to me.

That reminds me of my original concerns, some years ago when I started to work with git. They were almost exactly the same. But - frankly - I have already long forgotten why I felt so bad about letting some of the old habits go :-)

The major (and unsolvable properly) problem with git is moving files around (includes renaming) and keeping their full history while doing so. See the rant I mentioned:

https://tinyurl.com/yapz4xuw

There is no "proper" solution to that, unless you use your repository as private one and you can notify all collaborators / tools maintainers about the change. Then the approach listed there works. But if you post your repository as public, there is no good solution. But you know what? I learned to live with that somehow. I guess I just became less attached to the full history of all, each and every file, which - to be totally honest - has yet to prove being useful after some decades of working with VCSs.

--
SD!


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl
In reply to this post by smf

> On 2018-03-15, at 12:15, smf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when looking at history on their web interface, it's also limited in terms of number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked it up for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might suffer the same problem.
>>> I believe that this is an inherent limitation of the git repository format.
>> True.
>
> I believe it's up to the git client to follow renames,

There is --follow but it's not a solution as I wrote in my rant, some years ago already.

>> I believe that using horrible GUI clients takes too much of people's days. Just learn the basic flow and you'll have noticeably more time for doing productive work :-)
>
> I know people who share your opinion, they are always accidentally commiting code that they didn't mean to because it's too hard for them to see what they are actually pushing.

Which means they haven't learned the basic flow. I don't use any GUI (well, my editor shows me some badges on the files but "it's just there") and I - admittedly - had this kind of accident once, in the very beginning, when I was still learning and swearing under my breath.

--
SD!


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

Segher Boessenkool
In reply to this post by smf
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 11:15:09AM +0000, smf wrote:

> On 15/03/2018 10:44, [hidden email] wrote:
> >The last time I looked github doesn't allow you to follow renames when
> >looking at history on their web interface, it's also limited in terms of
> >number of files it will show you in a directory. We've just sucked it up
> >for the moment and haven't looked at switching, the others might suffer
> >the same problem.
> >>I believe that this is an inherent limitation of the git repository
> >>format.
> >True.
>
> I believe it's up to the git client to follow renames, which in this
> case is the github web server. It was raised as an issue with github and
> they said they would support it, but never did. Whether it's because
> they are scared of the extra processing required I don't know. I believe
> there is a chrome plugin which hacks round it but I don't use the web
> interface much because of the issues so I never tried it.
>
> >I believe that using horrible GUI clients takes too much of people's days.
> >Just learn the basic flow and you'll have noticeably more time for doing
> >productive work :-)
>
> I know people who share your opinion, they are always accidentally
> commiting code that they didn't mean to because it's too hard for them
> to see what they are actually pushing.

I don't know how GUIs do this, but on the command line, *the* git command
you need to learn first, you should use it *all the time*, at least until
you get comfortable with things, is

        git status

which tells you always exactly what is up (and gives hints what commands
to run, too).

Committing and pushing are separate things.  Don't push after every
commit, only when you are ready to publish the changes you made.

Never ever use push --force.  You *will* end up force-pushing more than
you intended some day.  Only force-push one branch at a time; for that,
it is much simpler and safer to do  git push myrepo +mybranch  .

Oh, and when you really messed up:

1) git status  will really tell you what to do most of the time.
2) It is unlikely you lost anything yet.  git reflog
3) git status
4) git status


Segher

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl

> On 2018-03-15, at 13:21, Segher Boessenkool <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't know how GUIs do this, but on the command line, *the* git command
> you need to learn first, you should use it *all the time*, at least until
> you get comfortable with things, is
>
> git status

Which is also why this should be the only command you should have conveniently aliased. At least until you get comfortable with things :-) I have it aliased as "gs"[*]


* - No, I don't use Ghostscript often these days anymore...
--
SD!


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

MiaM
In reply to this post by smf
Den Thu, 15 Mar 2018 11:15:09 +0000 skrev smf <[hidden email]>:
> > I believe that using horrible GUI clients takes too much of
> > people's days. Just learn the basic flow and you'll have noticeably
> > more time for doing productive work :-)
>
> I know people who share your opinion, they are always accidentally
> commiting code that they didn't mean to because it's too hard for
> them to see what they are actually pushing.

IMHO we should not forget the beauty of text mode user interfaces that
are more than command line options.

For example *ix rm has the interactive flag where it asks before
deleting each file.

AmigaOS has some nice interactive things in for example the DIR
command (which afaik no one ever used :) ).

Just automatically show a summary of what will happen and ask the user
for confirmation is a good thing.

--
(\_/) Copy the bunny to your mails to help
(O.o) him achieve world domination.
(> <) Come join the dark side.
/_|_\ We have cookies.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

Groepaz
In reply to this post by Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud)
Am Donnerstag, 15. März 2018, 07:27:46 CET schrieb Baltissen, GJPAA (Ruud):

> Hallo allemaal,
>
>
> Marko schreef:
>
> > I have been meaning to publish my source repositories, ...
>
>
> I have been thinking about that to. I don't want to depend on one provider.
>
>
> Patryk schreef:
>
> > Just use github.com OR bitbucket.org OR gitlab.com. In order of
> > "momentum".
>
> Groepaz schreef:
>
> > or use sourceforge
>
>
> Your experiences and advice, please? TIA!

i dont like git myself, and i find the github website really annoying in many
ways (which i am not going to elaborate or discuss about, it will only result
in the mentioned 50 pages of rant). svn and sourceforge works for me. i have a
github account myself, but thats mostly to not completely forget how to use
git (i have to use it every now and then for work). for other private stuff i
use a self hosted svn repo - which IMHO is the best thing to do. YMMV :)

--

http://hitmen.eu                 http://ar.pokefinder.org
http://vice-emu.sourceforge.net  http://magicdisk.untergrund.net

Java is high performance. By high performance we mean adequate. By adequate we
mean slow.
<Mr. Bunny>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

Jim Brain
In reply to this post by Marko Mäkelä
Overr the past few months, and really over the past few weeks, I have
been moving my projects to github.com, so leverage my experience as you
see fit.

I did not know about gitlab, but I did pick github over BitBucket. 
Though I am not naive to think that many people care to contribute to my
pet projects, the 5 person limit on the free version of BitBucket seemed
a bit restrictive, where free github's limitation of public only
projects actually aligns with my preference on project visibility. 
Though I think Atlassian is a fine firm, I felt github.com was more
established.

As a CVS and more recently SVN user, the switch was not overly
problematic.  Though I have been a heavy source code management system
user at work, my personal work is much less demanding.
The command line tools are easily understood, but the GUI options worked
fine for me as well (maybe I am not as picky as others :-)

I do have workflow preferences on where my repos sit in the fs, as I
have already running and working rsync jobs that ensure backups are kept
and secondary machines have always updated copies of source.  As well,
tools like Eclipse IDE wanted to move repos elsewhere, so I had to sort
that out.

I know it's probably not purist, but I found it fastest to create the
repo on github using my local naming, and then committing changes to the
bare repo and pushing to github.



--
Jim Brain
[hidden email]
www.jbrain.com


smf
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

smf
In reply to this post by MiaM

On 15/03/2018 17:31, Mia Magnusson wrote:
> IMHO we should not forget the beauty of text mode user interfaces that
> are more than command line options.

I prefer the beauty of a 3 way merge that I can use with a mouse.

I tried the text mode programs that tried to pretend to be graphical
ones and they weren't as good.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

MiaM
Den Thu, 15 Mar 2018 18:44:16 +0000 skrev smf <[hidden email]>:
>
> On 15/03/2018 17:31, Mia Magnusson wrote:
> > IMHO we should not forget the beauty of text mode user interfaces
> > that are more than command line options.
>
> I prefer the beauty of a 3 way merge that I can use with a mouse.

You can use the mouse in text mode user interfaces too :)

--
(\_/) Copy the bunny to your mails to help
(O.o) him achieve world domination.
(> <) Come join the dark side.
/_|_\ We have cookies.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

silverdr@wfmh.org.pl

> On 2018-03-15, at 20:12, Mia Magnusson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>> IMHO we should not forget the beauty of text mode user interfaces
>>> that are more than command line options.
>>
>> I prefer the beauty of a 3 way merge that I can use with a mouse.
>
> You can use the mouse in text mode user interfaces too :)

Only theoretically ;-)

But what you can do is to configure your tools so that command-line input triggers your favourite GUI tools to perform specific subtasks, like the one mentioned.

--
SD! - http://e4aws.silverdr.com/


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Where top publish my creations?

Spiro Trikaliotis
In reply to this post by silverdr@wfmh.org.pl
Hello,

* On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 11:44:07AM +0100 [hidden email] wrote:
>
> > On 2018-03-15, at 11:37, Marko Mäkelä <[hidden email]> wrote:
[...]
> > I should also find out if there are any usable svn-to-git gateways.
> > I would prefer to keep my own repositories in svn fsfs format,
> > because it is very rsync-friendly for making backups: each commit is
> > 2 new files with understandable names (svn revision is the number of
> > commits since the start). The git repository format with lots of
> > files named by some hash values is totally opaque to me.

git is also rsync-friendly, because normally, it does not change files
that are already present.

But, OTOH, why use rsync in the first place? git can be operated to
create full clones.

> It is definitely possible. For example Spiro here is also involved
> with cc65, where a big transition from SVN to git has taken place some
> time ago. To my understanding he participated in the process.

Yep. It is very easy. There is a git-svn module. You can use it to
create a git repository that tracks an SVN repository. You can even use
it to handle your work in git, but commit it back to SVN. I have done
this at work some years ago. It's very handy, especially as you have all
the history on your machine while you are offline.

I had used git-svn to track the SVN of the cc65 SVN of Uz. Then, I
pushed it to github.

That's why with cc65 on github, you have that "git-svn-id:" line in the
old commits. The last commit before the full transition to git is the
following:

commit e6aa00b339e1f36ef6e05aa2238096c81307e779
Author: uz <uz@b7a2c559-68d2-44c3-8de9-860c34a00d81>
Date:   Wed Mar 6 12:53:07 2013 +0000

    Reorder CF_xxx flags so that they can be used as table index.


    git-svn-id: svn://svn.cc65.org/cc65/trunk@5990 b7a2c559-68d2-44c3-8de9-860c34a00d81


There might be other ways, but it was the simplest one for me.

Regards,
Spiro.

--
Spiro R. Trikaliotis
http://www.trikaliotis.net/

12