Wedge

Arantor · « Reply #45 on July 19th, 2012, 05:28 PM »

@Norodo: That's the level of bad-ass I seek to attain, I'm still learning.

PantsManUK · « Reply #46 on July 20th, 2012, 03:07 PM »

Quote from Arantor on July 19th, 2012, 05:28 PM

@Norodo: That's the level of bad-ass I seek to attain, I'm still learning.

I think all of us that are in IT aspire to that level of bad-assery ;)

Nao · « Reply #47 on July 23rd, 2012, 03:33 PM »

Quote from CJ Jackson on July 19th, 2012, 02:04 AM

SmartGit is written in Java, as long as you not using a mixed OS environment (Virtual Machine) as I am, you should be fine, power to you, for me Java just screws round with clipboard synchronisation that Virtual Machine uses,

I did take note of your dislike of Java on your CV :P

Quote

TortoiseGit is pretty much Windows only, I choose to use something cross platform and not written in Java. Use whatever you're comfortable with. ;)

Right now? I'm 100x more comfortable with TortoiseSVN... :^^;:

Posted: July 23rd, 2012, 03:32 PM

Quote from PantsManUK on July 19th, 2012, 03:25 PM

You can always use BB for a Git repo ;)

Yeah, of course, but if I can choose between hg and git, I'll take hg anytime because of the comparatively better user friendliness...

PantsManUK · « Reply #48 on July 23rd, 2012, 04:18 PM »

Quote from Nao on July 23rd, 2012, 03:33 PM

Right now? I'm 100x more comfortable with TortoiseSVN... :^^;:
Posted: July 23rd, 2012, 03:32 PM

Yeah, of course, but if I can choose between hg and git, I'll take hg anytime because of the comparatively better user friendliness...

There's not that much difference between Hg and Git if you're using Tortoise* :P

*BUT*

There's not going to be pressure from me to steer you guys one way or the other, I'm comfortable in SVN, Hg and Git (although Git is my favourite of the three now I know how to work with it) :eheh:

Dragooon · « Reply #49 on July 23rd, 2012, 04:43 PM »

People find Git to be more user friendly than Hg :P, I find them to be same.

live627 · « Reply #50 on July 24th, 2012, 03:09 AM »

I just now found out that you can stage a chunk or even a single line of a file in Git :D That is so awesome!

Arantor · « Reply #51 on July 24th, 2012, 03:20 AM »

Yes, that's the only feature I'd actually appreciate in Git itself... ;)

PantsManUK · « Reply #52 on July 24th, 2012, 12:32 PM »

Quote from Dragooon on July 23rd, 2012, 04:43 PM

People find Git to be more user friendly than Hg :P, I find them to be same.

For most people, they only see their working copy and their client, and for the most folks here, I suspect that'd be graphical (Tortoise*). As far as command-line clients go, I much prefer Hg to Git, but graphical, Git all the way (and then, only because of Tower).

Quote from Arantor on July 24th, 2012, 03:20 AM

Yes, that's the only feature I'd actually appreciate in Git itself... ;)

Staging is *the* stand-out feature of Git in my book. If we're being honest, all the DVCS's are pretty-much the same at the end of the day; it's the few little differences that make all the difference in the world.

Nao · « Reply #53 on July 26th, 2012, 04:24 PM »

Quote from live627 on July 24th, 2012, 03:09 AM

I just now found out that you can stage a chunk or even a single line of a file in Git :D That is so awesome!

I've been staging my file for years...
In my diff file -> open file (from the side I want to modify)
Back to the diff file -> on each line I don't want to commit, I just click the corresponding button to revert the line.
Now save.
Back to the opened file - in Notepad2 I get a notice "File modified, do you want to save?". I say no... Then I just press Space then Backspace, to remind me that it's a modified file.

Commit.

Back to opened filed. Save. Done...
Really, it's how I do it. Otherwise, I'd never been committing anything...

Arantor · « Reply #54 on July 26th, 2012, 11:38 PM »

* Arantor has never done the staging stuff, if he's not ready to commit it as-is, he'll either revert and just deal with it later or do madness with copying files around.

Nao · « Reply #55 on July 29th, 2012, 01:35 PM »

Yesterday I took a backup of our svn repo, and converted it to git...
It takes quite a while to do, lol. Thankfully I have a fast machine but it still easily took an hour overall.
so it's "doable", perhaps I'll upload it to bitbucket (as a private repo obviously), to do some further tests.

Posted: July 27th, 2012, 07:09 AM

Well, so I did my tests, internally so far (haven't been using bb for this), and I really have to say... I can't live without rev numbers. That's all I can say for now. Maybe someone can give me therapy or something, but I was doing a blame earlier today, and everything I did based on this, would have been much harder if I hadn't had revision numbers. Revision dates are less 'blatant' to me, I can't sort them quickly in my heard, if I read 'October 2011' it'll take a tenth of a second to determine if it's earlier or later than 'May 2012', while between rev 1212 and rev 1574 it's immediate. Things like that...

I could try and force a 'tag' on each and every commit so far, can probably do a script for that, but I don't know if it's workable...

Arantor · « Reply #56 on July 29th, 2012, 02:30 PM »

It'd be workable but I suspect not that practical because future commits may or may not end up having that.

Git promotes a style of forking and merging complete features, not gradual iteration.

Nao · « Reply #57 on July 30th, 2012, 07:32 PM »

Yeah, and as such it promotes strong conflicts... :P

Okay, a question for git specialists...
I tried changing my e-mail address (which is freely viewable because of the git commits, duh!) into nao@wedge (a dummy one), and followed the instructions here using a github-sponsored gist:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/750172/how-do-i-change-the-author-of-a-commit-in-git

As a result, here's the log I have now in my local and remote repos... Great.

Now, how do I:
- Get rid of the extra... what is it, branch? (Which still shows my e-mail address!!)
- Clean this up on my github repo so that it doesn't show these rewrites as new commits...?!

PS: as you can see, I tried adding numeric tags to my commits as an attempt to make it 'look like svn'... :-/

Nao · « Reply #58 on August 2nd, 2012, 09:09 AM »

Just to make it clear...

Here's my personal decision on our workflow. Pete is free to give his opinion if it's any different of course :) I'm just assuming we're in agreement on this. Also, if anyone finds a good compromise on ease of use that doesn't require SVN... I'm all ears. But in the end I think SmartGit is just annoying and TortoiseGit is confusing the hell out of me, and command-line is... well, I asked for ease of use, not for ways to become a cyb3rzw4rL0rd.

- Present and Near feature: Repositoryhosting + SVN (private)
- Later future: Repositoryhosting or Google Code + SVN (public)
- Ways to allow for external contributions to code: use TortoiseSVN -> Create Patch -> post the .diff/.patch file somewhere. It's not particularly 'harder' than, say, allowing github forking and, instead of doing their own git fetch/merge crap, getting the fork on my hard drive, syncing it and then diffing between repos locally. Plus I can just read the patch file and modify it inline before I do my magic...

MultiformeIngegno · « Reply #59 on April 5th, 12:57 AM »

Yesterday I created an account on GH... I needed to submit a pull request. It's rather expensive though to have a paid account (private repos)!

Wedge

Home

Media

Login

Register

Arantor

Re: Github & stuff

PantsManUK

Re: Github & stuff

Nao

Re: Github & stuff

PantsManUK

Re: Github & stuff

Dragooon

Re: Github & stuff

live627

Re: Github & stuff

Arantor

Re: Github & stuff

PantsManUK

Re: Github & stuff

Nao

Re: Github & stuff

Arantor

Re: Github & stuff

Nao

Re: Github & stuff

Arantor

Re: Github & stuff

Nao

Re: Github & stuff

Nao

Re: Github & stuff

MultiformeIngegno

Re: Github & stuff