Subversion at LuaForge

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

Subversion at LuaForge

Matt Campbell-4
I'm thinking of registering a project at LuaForge. But before I do, does LuaForge support Subversion in addition to CVS? If not, are there plans to add Subversion support in the near future?

Thanks,
Matt

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Stefan Sandberg
Not yet, but it's in the works.. Perhaps next year, as it's a quite hefty undertaking to move all projects, and gforge is a complicated beast to tame.

Matt Campbell wrote:
I'm thinking of registering a project at LuaForge. But before I do, does LuaForge support Subversion in addition to CVS? If not, are there plans to add Subversion support in the near future?

Thanks,
Matt



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Asko Kauppi

Stefan, why should projects be moved? I think Matt simply meant svn repository hosting for interested projects, and that can well be provided alongside the current cvs.

Yes, it would certainly be a welcome addition. :)


Stefan Sandberg kirjoitti 20.11.2007 kello 21:49:

Not yet, but it's in the works.. Perhaps next year, as it's a quite hefty undertaking to move all projects, and gforge is a complicated beast to tame.

Matt Campbell wrote:
I'm thinking of registering a project at LuaForge. But before I do, does LuaForge support Subversion in addition to CVS? If not, are there plans to add Subversion support in the near future?

Thanks,
Matt




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Matt Campbell-4
Asko Kauppi wrote:
Stefan, why should projects be moved? I think Matt simply meant svn repository hosting for interested projects, and that can well be provided alongside the current cvs.

Yes, that is what I meant. Based on Stefan's response, I assumed that wouldn't be possible with GForge.

Matt

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Stefan Sandberg
Right, there is a new version of Gforge capable of this, but that means an upgrade, and that's the icky part. Kepler has plans for an upgrade sometime early next year, that's all I know.. I volunteered to investigate the matter since they're undermanned at the moment, but I don't have a lot of time, so if anyone knows of any other suitable cms for this other than gforge, do tell.. :)

(alternatively, if anyone knows gforge well, consider helping the community out :))

Matt Campbell wrote:
Asko Kauppi wrote:
Stefan, why should projects be moved? I think Matt simply meant svn repository hosting for interested projects, and that can well be provided alongside the current cvs.

Yes, that is what I meant. Based on Stefan's response, I assumed that wouldn't be possible with GForge.

Matt



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

RJP Computing
On Nov 20, 2007 3:23 PM, Stefan Sandberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
Right, there is a new version of Gforge capable of this, but that means
an upgrade, and that's the icky part.
Kepler has plans for an upgrade sometime early next year, that's all I
know.. I volunteered to investigate the matter since they're undermanned
at the moment, but I don't have a lot of time, so if anyone knows of any
other suitable cms for this other than gforge, do tell.. :)

(alternatively, if anyone knows gforge well, consider helping the
community out :))
 
This would be a great addition. Subversion is the way to go!
--
Regards,
Ryan
RJP Computing
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Miles Bader-2
"RJP Computing" <[hidden email]> writes:
>> (alternatively, if anyone knows gforge well, consider helping the
>> community out :))
>
> This would be a great addition. Subversion is the way to go!

Well subversion is probably better than CVS in most ways, but there are
many other choices too these days, often arguably better than
subversion...

-Miles

-- 
"Suppose He doesn't give a shit?  Suppose there is a God but He
just doesn't give a shit?"  [George Carlin]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

David Kastrup
Miles Bader <[hidden email]> writes:

> "RJP Computing" <[hidden email]> writes:
>>> (alternatively, if anyone knows gforge well, consider helping the
>>> community out :))
>>
>> This would be a great addition. Subversion is the way to go!
>
> Well subversion is probably better than CVS in most ways, but there
> are many other choices too these days, often arguably better than
> subversion...

In fact, for projects with layered responsibility and versioning, a
distributed version control system is arguably better-suited since
everybody is then free to entertain his own forks and branches without
requiring upstream approval.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Andre Carregal
On Nov 21, 2007 7:18 AM, David Kastrup <[hidden email]> wrote:
> In fact, for projects with layered responsibility and versioning, a
> distributed version control system is arguably better-suited since
> everybody is then free to entertain his own forks and branches without
> requiring upstream approval.

True. While we are considering offering SVN next year, git would be a
nice improvement for those interested in a more flexible SCM.

There is a GForge installation using it (http://alioth.debian.org/)
but that does not mean it would be an easy move. I guess we would need
to wait for GForge to implement such a thing and eventually offer some
Web based front end [1].

Unfortunately, as Stefan mentioned, we are really unable to implement
any changes this year. Meanwhile, any help or comments on GForge
migration to SVN (or git) would be welcome.

André

[1] - http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/InterfacesFrontendsAndTools


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Asko Kauppi
In reply to this post by David Kastrup

However, how many such projects are there in luaForge? Normally, projects have -hopefully- at least one person in charge of them more than others. I'd feel going git would endanger getting even subproject fragmentation, wouldn't it? :)

And, since GForge seems to have svn support in later versions, case closed?

-asko


David Kastrup kirjoitti 21.11.2007 kello 11:18:

Miles Bader <[hidden email]> writes:

"RJP Computing" <[hidden email]> writes:
(alternatively, if anyone knows gforge well, consider helping the
community out :))

This would be a great addition. Subversion is the way to go!

Well subversion is probably better than CVS in most ways, but there
are many other choices too these days, often arguably better than
subversion...

In fact, for projects with layered responsibility and versioning, a
distributed version control system is arguably better-suited since
everybody is then free to entertain his own forks and branches without
requiring upstream approval.

--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

David Kastrup
Please don't toppost with fullquote below.  Reading order is top to
bottom.  Reordered

Asko Kauppi <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> David Kastrup kirjoitti 21.11.2007 kello 11:18:
>
>> Miles Bader <[hidden email]> writes:
>>
>>> "RJP Computing" <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>>> (alternatively, if anyone knows gforge well, consider helping the
>>>>> community out :))
>>>>
>>>> This would be a great addition. Subversion is the way to go!
>>>
>>> Well subversion is probably better than CVS in most ways, but there
>>> are many other choices too these days, often arguably better than
>>> subversion...
>>
>> In fact, for projects with layered responsibility and versioning, a
>> distributed version control system is arguably better-suited since
>> everybody is then free to entertain his own forks and branches without
>> requiring upstream approval.
>
> However, how many such projects are there in luaForge?  Normally,
> projects have -hopefully- at least one person in charge of them more
> than others.

That is exactly the use case for distributed version control systems:
those that are "less in charge" don't have to rely on the person "more
in charge" for handing them branches, or even on network connectivity in
order to do their own tasks.

> I'd feel going git would endanger getting even subproject
> fragmentation, wouldn't it?  :)

Huh?  I don't understand what you mean.

> And, since GForge seems to have svn support in later versions, case
> closed?

Huh?  Subversion is a centralistic, not a distributed version control
system.  So how does this close the case?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Doug Currie
In reply to this post by Asko Kauppi
On Wednesday, November 21, 2007 Asko Kauppi wrote: 

> I'd feel going git would endanger getting even subproject
> fragmentation, wouldn't it? :)

Not to mention the lack of Windows support for git:
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Git_on_Windows

e

-- 
Doug Currie
Londonderry, NH, USA


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Thomas Harning Jr.
Doug Currie wrote:
On Wednesday, November 21, 2007 Asko Kauppi wrote:
I'd feel going git would endanger getting even subproject
fragmentation, wouldn't it? :)

Not to mention the lack of Windows support for git:
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Git_on_Windows

e
Git is supported on Windows in the mingw port... There's also some support brewing quickly in 'egit' for Eclipse. Good for you LuaEclipse users out there.


Fragmentation wouldn't be a problem at all... if a project allowed for 'official' distributed dev, then changes would be significantly easier to give back in an organized way. Ex: Support for a new DB could be worked/tested/etc in a branch of LuaSQL and then when the dev thought it good enough to merge into mainline, a patchset could be submitted that would merge cleanly in. Fragmentation would be a result of difficulty in submitting changes and of sharing those changes before they would be merged (or not).

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Miles Bader-2
In reply to this post by Doug Currie
Doug Currie <[hidden email]> writes:
> Not to mention the lack of Windows support for git:
> http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Git_on_Windows

Git "native" support for windows is flaky, but it does exist (and is
actively being developed).

However, AFAIK (I don't use windows myself) you can just use cygwin to
run git on windows and everything should work.

Of course, none of that should have any bearing on whether luaforge
supports git or not.  Ideally luaforge would just support every popular
SCS, and let the project maintainers decide what they want to use.

[For instance, a Lua interface to the X window system would be a natural
candidate for git -- X isn't important for windows users (so the state
of git windows support is irrelevant), and the xorg project uses git, so
X developers are used to it.]

-Miles

-- 
P.S.  All information contained in the above letter is false,
      for reasons of military security.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Doug Currie
On Wednesday, November 21, 2007 Miles Bader wrote: 

> Doug Currie <[hidden email]> writes:
>> Not to mention the lack of Windows support for git:
>> http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Git_on_Windows

> Git "native" support for windows is flaky, but it does exist (and is
> actively being developed).

> However, AFAIK (I don't use windows myself) you can just use cygwin to
> run git on windows and everything should work.

Well, I prefer not to run flaky software, or cygwin, on my machine,
and I suspect I am not alone.

> Of course, none of that should have any bearing on whether luaforge
> supports git or not.  Ideally luaforge would just support every popular
> SCS, and let the project maintainers decide what they want to use.

Sure. However if the number of supported SCS at LuaForge is limited,
my vote would be for Subversion and Mercurial. These are centralized
and distributed models for a wider set of platforms.

e

-- 
Doug Currie
Londonderry, NH, USA


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Stefan Sandberg
The point of all this is that SVN is more or less phasing CVS out, version 2, if you will.. Subversion has an excellent array of clients, tools and integrations for most popular IDE's, readily available tutorials and help, and is easy and uncomplicated to work with. The idea of having to muck around with cygwin and try to "fake" a non windows environment just because the chosen version control is buggy is just stupid.

I'm all for an alternative, but it would have to prove itself to overshadow SVN enough that it also overweigh the benefits of using already available subversion offer, through the latest GForge release, which also brings up the point of familiarity. A complete facelift of luaforge might sound attractive for practical reasons, or aesthetics, but it's probably not from the view of the casual users who use it on a daily basis. They might not object to a one-time move from CVS to SVN, but a complete makeover of the whole concept will most likely make some people upset, especially if they're already happy.

Baby steps.. baby steps.


Doug Currie wrote:
On Wednesday, November 21, 2007 Miles Bader wrote:
Doug Currie <[hidden email]> writes:
Not to mention the lack of Windows support for git:
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Git_on_Windows

Git "native" support for windows is flaky, but it does exist (and is
actively being developed).

However, AFAIK (I don't use windows myself) you can just use cygwin to
run git on windows and everything should work.

Well, I prefer not to run flaky software, or cygwin, on my machine,
and I suspect I am not alone.

Of course, none of that should have any bearing on whether luaforge
supports git or not.  Ideally luaforge would just support every popular
SCS, and let the project maintainers decide what they want to use.

Sure. However if the number of supported SCS at LuaForge is limited,
my vote would be for Subversion and Mercurial. These are centralized
and distributed models for a wider set of platforms.

e



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Miles Bader-2
In reply to this post by Doug Currie
Doug Currie <[hidden email]> writes:
> Well, I prefer not to run flaky software, or cygwin, on my machine,
> and I suspect I am not alone.

I can understand why you wouldn't want to run flaky software.

Cygwin, on the other hand is perfectly fine software.  You can certainly
decide not to use it if you want, but luaforge support decisions should
not be predicated on such arbitrary preferences.

> However if the number of supported SCS at LuaForge is limited, my vote
> would be for Subversion and Mercurial. These are centralized and
> distributed models for a wider set of platforms.

Git is a very important SCS (arguably more important than mercurial),
and is certainly worth the effort to support.

-Miles

-- 
`To alcohol!  The cause of, and solution to,
 all of life's problems' --Homer J. Simpson

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Andre Carregal
On Nov 21, 2007 9:12 PM, Miles Bader <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > However if the number of supported SCS at LuaForge is limited, my vote
> > would be for Subversion and Mercurial. These are centralized and
> > distributed models for a wider set of platforms.
>
> Git is a very important SCS (arguably more important than mercurial),
> and is certainly worth the effort to support.

I guess my comments just made things more confusing, let me try again.

Currently we are studying how to enable SVN in LuaForge and plan to
get there whenever we can with our current manpower. This would be a
natural upgrade since GForge already has SVN as one of the SCM
options, we just happen to be using an older version of GForge in
LuaForge.

On the other hand, we are also considering allowing the use of
different SCMs (where the mention of git was just a personal bias) in
the LuaForge machine, but without integrating them with the GForge
software.

This would let those who want to use something less "traditional"
choose a different SCM for their projects, but would also mean that
the SCM tab in that project would be meaningless. We do not plan to
offer web interfaces for any SCM not natively supported by GForge.

The problem is that a move like that would mean dealing with SSH
somewhere in the data path, which is currently disabled for security
reasons for services other than CVS (and SVN in the next upgrade). If
someone has experience on such scenarios with different SCMs please
contact me outside the list.

So, SVN has a good chance of being implemented next year. Offering
separate SCM options is still in the "what if" phase.

André


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Subversion at LuaForge

Mildred Ki'Lya
In reply to this post by Miles Bader-2
Le Wed 21/11/2007 à 09:25 Miles Bader à Ãcrit:
>
> Well subversion is probably better than CVS in most ways, but there
> are many other choices too these days, often arguably better than
> subversion...
> 
> -Miles
> 


Subversion would be a great enhancement (less pain than CVS) but I
still would prefer something decentralized like gut, bazaar or
mercurial. And I don't think it is so difficult to enable.

For instance, as far as i know bazaar-ng, it only needs a FTP or SFTP
(using SSH) server to be able to put files on it, and a way to get then
anonymously (like HTTP). So the it only needs to set up a (S)FTP server
with the correct access list to allow GForge users (in separate
directories of course). The best thing in my opinion would be to have a
SFTP server that uses SSH key authentication.

And maybe the others decentralized SCN doesn't need more ... I don't
know though.

And for more integration, there are web-interfaces. But these are not
really required.

Mildred

-- 
Mildred Ki'lya
E-Mail:	mildred593(at)online.fr

Site:	<http://mildred632.free.fr/>
XMPP:	<[hidden email]> (GoogleTalk, Jabber)

GPG:	197C A7E6 645B 4299 6D37 684B 6F9D A8D6 [9A7D 2E2B]